US' 


LIIBR^RV 

OK   THI. 


University  of  California. 

OTKT  CM-' 


^       r 

Class 


XS^be  TUnlverslti^  of  dbicago 

FOUNDED  BY  JOHN  D.  ROCKEFELLER 


THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH 


PART    OF    A    DISSERTATION    SUBMITTED    TO    THE    FACULTY   OF    THE 

GRADUATE    DIVINITY    SCHOOL,    IN    CANDIDACY    FOR    THE 

DEGREE    OF    DOCTOR    OF    PHILO<^OPHY 

(department   of   old    testament    LITERATURE    AND    'NTERPRETATION) 


BY 

JOHN    M.   P.  SMITH 


PRINTED    BY 

^be  TIlniversitB  of  Cbicago  press 


THIS    DISSERTATION 

WAS    PRESENTED    TO    THE    FACULTY   AND   ACCEPTED 

IN    JUNE,    1899 


[Reprinted  from  the  American  Journal  of  Theology,  Vol.  V,  pp.  505~3.>] 


occ^ 


\B  P  *  '<  )' 


\j?.^ 


THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH. 

The  origin  of  the  idea  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  must  be  sought  in 
the  pre-prophetic  stage  of  Israel's  history.  The  first  appearance  of  the 
conception  in  the  Old  Testament  is  in  the  prophecy  of  Amos,  where  it 
is  clearly  defined  and  formulated.  The  idea  which  Amos  found  already 
existing  and  occupying  a  large  place  in  the  thought  of  the  people  was 
apparently  a  conception  of  the  day  as  a  time  when  a  period  of  great 
glory  and  prosperity  was  to  be  inaugurated  for  Israel.  Naturally  such 
a  day  was  greatly  desired.  Whence  came  this  idea  ?  It  seems  to  be 
a  development  of  several  ideas  in  combination.  One  of  these  is  the 
conception  of  a  divine  mission  which  early  took  possession  of  the  con- 
sciousness of  Israel.'  Tradition  exhibits  many  traces  of  such  a  con- 
ception. The  founders  of  the  nation  and  all  her  great  leaders  are  said 
to  have  had  in  mind  a  unique  position  for  Israel  among  the  nations. 
Utterances  to  this  effect  are  common  in  the  J  and  E  documents,*  and, 
belonging  as  they  do  to  some  of  the  earliest  of  Israel's  historical  records, 
it  is  not  probable  that  they  are  wholly  without  basis  in  facts.  They 
may,  therefore,  be  properly  taken  as  evidence  for  the  existence  in  very 
early  times  of  a  hope  for  a  glorious  future  of  the  nation  as  Yahweh's 
representative  in  the  world. 

In  further  support  of  the  existence  of  some  such  ambition  as  this 
may  be  urged  the  presence  of  similar  hopes  among  Semitic  peoples  in 
general.^  The  national  character  of  Semitic  gods  seems  best  explained 
on  the  supposition  that  small  and  weak  families,  clans,  and  tribes  sub- 
mitted to  the  dominion  of  larger  and  more  powerful  communities 
because  of  some  necessity,  such  as  conquest,  lack  of  food,  or  need 
of  protection  and  assistance  against  powerful  enemies.  In  such  a 
union  the  superiority  of  the  god  of  the  more  powerful  body  of  people 
was  acknowledged,  and  the  god  of  the  weaker  people  was  reduced  to 
subordinate  rank.  As  this  process  continued,  a  nation  gradually  came 
into  existence,  and  the  original  tribal  god  developed  into  a  national 
god.*     But  the  fact  of  his  having  reached  this  dignity  did  not  rob  him 

'  Cf.  Frants  Buhl,  American  Journal  of  Theology,  Vol.  II,  p.  767. 

'^.  g-.,  Gen.  12  :2S.;  l8:l8ff.;  27:29;  28:14;  Exod.  19  :  5  f.;  34  :  10  ;  Numb. 
23:9;    24:9,  17. 

3W.  R.  Smith,  The  Religion  of  the  Semites,  2d  ed.,  pp.  75-81. 

*  So  Menzies,  History  of  Religion, ■^'^.  79  ff.;  D'Alviella,  Idea  of  God,  pp.  20  ff.;  etal. 
3 


4  THE  DA  Y  OF  YAHWEH 

of  his  original  expansive  force;  his  nature  remained  essentially  the 
same,  and  his  ambition  for  power  would  carry  him  on  to  universal 
dominion,  were  his  adherents  sturdy  and  aggressive  enough  to  attain 
that  goal.  It  was  therefore  the  natural  and  proper  desire  of  every 
Semitic  nation  to  extend  the  influence  of  its  own  particular  god  to  the 
farthest  possible  limit.  This  could  best  be  accomplished  through  the 
conquest  of  new  territory  over  which  the  sway  of  the  god  might  be 
established.  Hence  wars  of  conquest,  which  were  at  the  same  time 
religious  wars,  were  of  unceasing  occurrence. 

Assyrian  records  furnish  the  best  illustrations  of  this  spirit  of 
expansion  in  political  and  religious  affairs.  The  wars  of  Assyria  were 
preeminently  religious  wars.  Every  king  in  every  campaign  declares 
himself  to  have  been  incited,  emboldened,  and  prospered  by  his  nation's 
gods.  Kings  felt  and  declared  themselves  to  be  the  agents  of  the 
gods,  and  regarded  it  as  one  of  their  chief  duties  to  widen  the  dominion 
of  the  gods  and  to  manifest  their  power.^  Esarhaddon,  for  example,  well 
expresses  the  animating  spirit  of  Assyrian  warfare  thus:  "The  names 
of  the  great  gods  they  invoked  together  and  trusted  to  their  power. 
I,  however,  trusted  in  Ashur,  my  lord,  and  like  a  bird  out  of  the  moun- 
tains I  captured  him  and  cut  off  his  head.  In  order  to  exhibit  the  might  of 
Ashur,  my  lord,  before  the  eyes  of  the  peoples,  I  hung  the  heads  of  Sanduarri 
and  Abdimilkuti  upon  the  necks  of  their  great  men."*  The  inscrip- 
tions of  Tiglath-pileser  I.,  Shalmaneser  II.,  Tiglath-pileser  III.,  Sar- 
gon,  Sennacherib,  Esarhaddon,  Ashurbanipal,  and  others  are  full  of 
illustrations  showing  the  place  and  influence  of  religious  ideas  in  con- 
nection with  the  national  territorial  development.'  The  evident  desire 
was  that  Ashur  should  be  acknowledged  as  the  supreme  deity  through- 
out the  known  world.  The  kings  certainly  regarded  him  as  such  and 
commonly  spoke  of  themselves  as  kings  of  the  four  quarters  of  the 
world  over  which  Ashur  had  given  them  dominion.^ 

The  amazingly  rapid  spread  of  the  religion  of  Mohammed  is 
another  illustration  of  the  efficient  service  rendered  by  religious  ideals 

S  Cf.  McCURDY,  History,  Prophecy  and  the  Monuments,  Vol.  I,  pp.  63  f.;  Savce, 
Early  Israel  and  the  Surrounding  Nations,  pp.  248  f. 

*The  Six-Sided  Prism,  Cylinder  A,  col.  i,  11.  43  ff. 

T  Cf.  Sennacherib,  Taylor- Prism,  zo\.  \,  11.  10  ff.,  63;  i,  42  f ;  !ii,  42;  iv,  43; 
Esarhaddon,  Cylinder  A,  col.  ii,  1.  45  ;  iii,  7-12,  40-48,  53  ;  iv,  19-25,  38-47  ;  Ashur- 
banipal, Annals,  col.  iv,  1.  34;  viii,  Bff.;  ix,  Ii2ff.;   etc. 

^For  the  same  idea  see  the  closing  tablet  of  the  Dibbara  Legend,  translated  by 
Iastrow  in  Religion  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria,  p.  535,  and  by  W.  Muss-Arnolt  in 
R.  F.  Harper's  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  Literature  ("The  World's  Great  Books," 
Aldine  edition;  New  York:  D.  Appleton,  1901),  p.  314. 


THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH  5 

in  the  furtherance  of  political  development.  The  religious  and  ethical 
principles  upheld  by  Mohammed  were  certainly  purer  and  more  vigor- 
ous than  those  of  the  earlier  Arabic  religions  opposed  by  him,  and 
his  success  was,  no  doubt,  largely  due  to  this  fact;  but  it  seems  prob- 
able that  the  old  Semitic  idea  of  a  national  god  upon  whose  people 
there  rested  an  obligation  to  extend  his  dominion  had  much  to  do 
in  arousing  the  extraordinary  zeal  and  energy  with  which  the  new 
religion  was  propagated,  and  that  chiefly  by  force  of  arms.  For 
such  a  religion  and  such  a  god  success  was  the  best  recommendation ; 
a  recital  of  the  triumphs  already  achieved  was  one  of  the  best  argu- 
ments for  inducing  still  other  peoples  to  acknowledge  the  supremacy  of 
the  new  religion  and  the  new  god.  Moreover,  confidence  engendered 
by  successes  already  won  carried  the  victors  on  to  fresh  contests  and 
victories  for  their  god. 

In  view  of  such  corroborating  testimony  from  without,  it  is  not 
strange  to  find  evidence  within  Israel  of  a  similar  laudable  ambition 
for  Yahweh  and  of  a  hope  for  the  time  when  he  would  bring  great 
glory  to  his  people.  That  this  hope  originated  at  a  very  early  date  is 
evident,  since  it  appears  strongly  in  the  earliest  literature.  Moreover, 
as  suggested  by  Professor  McCurdy,'  the  possession  of  such  a  hope  is  a 
necessary  presupposition  to  any  satisfactory  explanation  of  the  fact  that 
Israel  was  able  to  obtain  and  hold  for  herself  a  home  among  the  tribes 
of  Canaan,  poorly  disciplined  as  she  was  and  beset  by  foes  on  every 
side.  Her  strong  faith  in  Yahweh's  power  and  in  his  purpose  to  bring 
glory  to  himself  through  Israel  gave  her  courage  in  the  face  of  all 
sorts  of  dangers  and  difficulties.  Hence  it  is  that  every  forward  step 
during  the  period  of  the  conquest  and  the  years  immediately  following 
seems  to  have  been  preceded  and  accompanied  by  a  great  revival  of 
zeal  for  Yahweh.  Furthermore,  the  course  of  Israel's  early  national 
history  was  not  unfavorable  to  the  growth  of  this  idea  of  a  glorious 
destiny.  Beginning  with  Saul  and  continuing  through  the  days  of 
Solomon,  victory  and  prosperity  had  come  to  Israel  in  no  small  meas- 
ure. Even  in  later  centuries  the  reign  of  David  was  looked  back  upon 
longingly  as  a  sort  of  golden  age,  and  ideals  of  the  future  were  shaped 
in  accordance  with  the  glorified  and  magnified  traditions  of  the  Davidic 
days.  Solomon  extended  his  influence  so  far,  established  his  kingdom 
so  securely,  and  equipped  himself  so  splendidly  as  to  be  the  source 
of  envy  and  wonder  to  all  surrounding  peoples.  He  was  in  a  fair  way  to 
make  Israel  aworld-empire  such  as  Assyria  and  Babylon  later  came  to  be. 

9  Op.  cit.,  Vol.  II,  pp.  no  f. 


6  THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH 

After  the  check  consequent  upon  the  division  of  the  kingdom,  north- 
ern Israel,  under  the  able  leadership  of  the  house  of  Omri,  gradually- 
reasserted  herself.  This  new  development  was  retarded  by  the  long  war 
with  Syria,  but  by  the  time  of  Jeroboam  II.  Damascus  was  subdued,  and 
Israel  had  attained  prosperity  and  power  second  only  to  those  enjoyed 
during  the  age  of  David  and  Solomon.  History  thus  seemed  to  jus- 
tify the  popular  hope  of  a  gloriously  bright  future." 

In  addition  to  this,  the  work  of  the  earliest  prophets  tended  in  the 
same  direction.  All  the  prophets  up  to  the  time  of  Amos,  with  the 
possible  exception  of  Elijah,  seem  to  have  foretold  success  and  glory 
for  their  people."  They  constantly  emphasized  the  fact  that  Israel 
was  Yahweh's  people,  and  that,  if  Israel  remained  faithful  to  him,  he 
would  and  must  lead  her  on  to  victory. 

Thus  far  we  have  found  the  hope  of  a  great  future  for  the  nation 
through  Yahweh's  help  to  have  been  (i)  fostered  by  tradition  ;  (2)  an 
outgrowth  of  the  general  Semitic  conception  of  a  God-given  commis- 
sion to  enlarge  the  sphere  of  the  divine  authority;  (3)  a  prerequisite  as 
a  source  of  inspiration  and  courage  in  the  great  work  of  the  conquest 
of  Canaan ;  (4)  developed  and  strengthened  by  its  apparent  partial 
realization  in  the  progress  of  the  nation's  history;  and  (5)  enforced 
impressively  upon  the  national  consciousness  by  the  nation's  prophets, 
the  spokesmen  of  Yahweh,  the  nation's  God.  In  view  of  these  facts 
the  existence  of  such  a  conception  of  Israel's  national  destiny  in  the 
eighth  century  B.  C.  seems  certain.  It  was  not  a  conception  of  an 
exalted  ethical  and  religious  content,  for  ethical  and  religious  stand- 
ards were  as  yet  comparatively  low.  It  was  rather  the  conception  of  a 
mission,  one  of  the  chief  ends  of  which  was  to  bring  glory  to  those 
who  fulfilled  it. 

A  second  and  important  element  in  the  formation  of  the  early  idea 
of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  was  the  conception  of  Yahweh  which  then  pre- 
vailed." The  people  were  not  far  removed  from  polytheism,  as  is  shown, 
among  other  things,  by  the  frequency  and  ease  with  which  in  after 
years  they  took  up  with  idolatrous  rites ;  by  the  survival  of  the  plural 
form   D%"i'bi<  ;  by  the  use  of  teraphim;    by  the  incident   of  the  calf- 
worship  at  Sinai ;  and  by  traces  lingering  in  many  words  and  customs.'" 
"  Cf.  G.  A.  Smith,  The  Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets,  Vol.  I,  pp.  49  f- 
"  Cf.  I  Kings  20:  13,  28;  22:6,  II,  12;  2  Kings  2  :  13-19;  I3  =  H-IQ;  M  =  25- 
'«  Cf.  R.  H.  Charles,  A  Critical  History  of  the  Doctrine  of  a  Future  Life  in  Israel 
in  fudaism  and  in  Christianity,  pp.  85  f. 

»"  Cf.  Baudissin,  Studien  ztir  semitischen  Rcligionsgeschichte,  Heft  I,  pp.  55-65- 


THE  DA  Y  OF  YAHWEH  7 

The  intermediate  stage,  monolatry,  was  essential  as  a  stepping-stone  to 
monotheism,  and  the  religion  of  Israel  in  the  eighth  century  was  of 
this  kind.  Israel's  God  was  only  one  among  many  gods;  the  name 
Yahweh  as  a  proper  name  distinguished  him  from  Chemosh,  god  of 
Moab,  Milcom  of  Ammon,  Baal  of  Phoenicia,  and  the  gods  of  other 
surrounding  peoples.  This  monolatrous  worship  persisted  far  into 
the  prophetic  period,  monotheism  not  being  fully  accepted  and  estab- 
lished in  the  thought  of  the  nation  until  the  days  of  the  exile.'^  The 
difference  between  Yahweh  and  other  gods  was  but  dimly  realized  in 
the  early  days  of  Yahwism.  The  points  of  resemblance  between  the 
worship  of  Israel  and  that  of  Canaan  were  more  noticeable  than  the 
points  of  difference,  and  the  constant  endeavor  of  Israel's  religious 
leaders  was  to  keep  the  people  from  taking  over  so  much  of  Baal- 
worship  into  the  Yahweh-worship  as  to  destroy  the  distinctive  character 
of  the  latter.  The  preservation  of  true  Yahweh-worship  was  essential  to 
the  development  and  continuance  of  national  life  and  individuality.  The 
Yahweh-religion  was  almost  the  only  unifying  influence  which  held 
together  the  heterogeneous  and  widely  scattered  elements  of  Israel. 
Yahweh's  especial  function  was  to  be  the  deliverer  of  Israel  in  time  of 
danger.  He  was  emphatically  a  war-god,  and  it  was  as  such  that  he 
was  honored  by  Israel.  He  had  proven  his  superiority  to  the  gods  of 
Egypt  at  the  time  of  the  exodus  ;  and  again,  in  the  attack  upon 
Canaan,  he  had  demonstrated  his  superiority  to  the  Canaanitish  Baalim 
by  conquering  them  and  their  people.  This  was,  indeed,  the  only 
kind  of  superiority  that  Israel  was  as  yet  prepared  to  appreciate.  Her 
existence  during  the  greater  part  of  the  pre-prophetic  period  was  one 
constant  struggle  to  maintain  her  place  against  the  peoples  of  Canaan, 
and  a  god  who  could  not,  or  would  not,  render  efficient  service  in  this 
contest  was  not  likely  to  command  her  respect  and  adherence.  The 
victories  of  Israel  over  her  enemies  were  necessary,  not  only  to  her 
national  existence,  but  also  to  her  retention  of  the  Yahweh-religion. 
The  work  of  Elijah  in  his  fearless  opposition  to  Baal-worship,  and  the 
work  of  Elisha  as  the  source  of  the  inspiration,  wisdom,  and  patriot- 
ism in  the  conduct  of  the  war  with  Damascus  which  enabled  Israel  to 
achieve  final  victory,  sealed  Israel  to  Yahweh  in  closest  allegiance. 

'3 See  Judg.  6  :  31  ;  9  :  13;  11  :  24;  Gen.  28  :  20  f.;  Exod.  15  :  11  ;  18  :  11 ;  I  Sam. 
26  :  19 ;  28  :  13 ;  Amos  9:7;  Ezek.  8:12;  9:9;  etc.  For  a  fuller  treatment  of  the 
matter  consult  Smend,  Lehrbuch  der  alttestamentlichen  Religionsgeschichie  (2d 
ed.),  pp.  193-200 ;  MONTEFIORE,  i?if/?g-zo«  of  the  Ancient  Hebrews  {=^"T\iQ  Hibbert 
Lectures,"  1892),  pp.  228,  268  f.;  McCurdy,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  370  f.;  W.  R. 
Smith,  The  Prophets  of  Israel  {n&vf  edition),  pp.  59  ff.;  Schultz,  Old  Testament  The- 
ology, Vol.  I,  pp.  175  f.;  BUDDE,  Religion  of  Israel  to  the  Exile,  pp.  210  f. 


8  THE  DA  V  OF  YAHWEH 

Though  the  recognition  and  acceptance  of  Yahweh  as  Israel's  God 
did  not  involve  the  denial  of  reality  to  the  gods  of  neighboring 
peoples,  but  permitted  them  to  be  regarded  as  real  deities  holding  rela- 
tions with  their  worshipers  similar  to  those  existing  between  Yahweh 
and  Israel,  yet  Yahweh  was  supreme  in  Israel  and  in  everything 
relating  to  Israel,  and  thus,  when  the  interests  of  Israel  clashed  with 
those  of  her  neighbors,  it  was  to  be  expected  that  he  would  bring 
about  the  triumph  of  his  own  nation.  However,  the  recognition  of  the 
reality  of  the  gods  of  the  nations  was  a  great  hindrance  to  Israel's  full 
realization  of  the  true  nature  of  her  mission  to  the  world.  It  shut  off 
almost  entirely  the  outflow  of  the  altruistic  spirit  and  left  the  concep- 
tion of  Israel's  destiny  to  find  embodiment  in  hopes  for  Israel's 
supremacy  among  the  nations  and  Yahweh's  dominion  over  the  gods. 
It  was  a  self-centered  mission,  a  destiny  founded  on  ambition  for 
Israel,  and  jealousy  for  the  honor  of  Yahweh. 

Another  source  of  light  upon  the  origin  of  the  idea  of  the  Day  of 
Yahweh  is  found  in  the  political  relations  of  early  Israel  with  outside 
nations.  After  the  fierce  struggles  connected  with  the  early  days  of 
the  settlement  in  Canaan,  Israel  seems  to  have  adopted  a  policy  of 
conciliation  toward  the  Canaanites  in  whose  land  she  was  an  unwel- 
come intruder.  The  battle  led  by  Deborah  and  Barak  was  the  last 
great  conflict  with  the  people  of  the  land.  Deadly  enmity  gave  way 
little  by  little  to  peaceful  intercourse.  Conciliation  was  Israel's  wisest 
course;  dwelling  in  the  midst  of  a  numerous  people  far  more  advanced 
in  civilization  than  herself,  and  ready  to  take  advantage  of  any  and 
every  opportunity  to  drive  her  out  of  their  territory,  it  was  necessary 
for  her  to  strengthen  herself  in  every  possible  way.  She  therefore 
gladly  admitted  "strangers"  into  her  ranks  and  threw  open  to  them 
all  the  privileges  of  Israelites.'^  She  gained  much  by  accretions 
resulting  from  such  a  policy  and  by  the  friendly  feeling  thus  cultivated 
toward  neighboring  tribes. 

But,  though  Israel  succeeded  thus  in  bringing  her  immediate 
neighbors  into  harmony  with  herself,  she  was  not  suffered  to  develop 
her  resources  in  peace.  Her  whole  life  up  to  the  eighth  century  was 
one  almost  continual  struggle  for  existence.  Occupying,  as  she  did, 
the  most  fertile  oasis  in  northern  Arabia,  she  was  subjected  to  the 
onslaughts  of  less  fortunate  tribes  who  coveted  the  rich  possession  for 
themselves.      Prior    to   David's    time   contests   were   waged   with    the 

'*For  a  discussion  of  the  whole  question  of  the  place  of  "strangers  "  in  Israel  see 
Bertholet,  Die Stellung  der  Israeliten  und  der  Juden  zu  den  Fremden,  pp.  1-67. 


THE  DA  Y  OF  YAHWEH  9 

Moabites,  Ammonites,  Amalekites,  Philistines,  Midianites,  Edomites, 
and  Syrians,  deliverance  being  wrought  for  Israel  under  the  leadership 
of  Ehud,  Shamgar,  Gideon,  Jephthah,  Samson,  and  Saul.  David's 
reign  was  a  period  of  war  and  conquest  resulting  in  great  renown  for 
Israel.  The  territory  acquired  by  David  began  to  revolt  and  slip 
away  under  Solomon's  administration.  The  long  struggle  with  Syria 
began  in  the  reign  of  Baasha  of  Israel,  and  continued  with  bitter  hos- 
tility down  through  the  reigns  of  Jehoahaz  and  Jehoash.  In  addition 
to  this  there  were  skirmishes  with  the  Philistines  in  the  days  of  Nadab 
of  Israel;  war  with  Mesha,  king  of  Moab,  in  the  time  of  Jehoram  ; 
revolt  and  reconquest  of  Edom  under  Joash  and  Amaziah  respectively. 
Moreover,  Assyria  appears  upon  the  scene  as  collector  of  tribute  from 
Jehu.  The  last  great  war,  that  with  Damascus,  was  a  long  drawn-out 
agony  for  Israel ;  but  at  last  Yahweh  sent  Israel  a  savior  in  the  person 
of  Assyria,  and  she  enjoyed  a  brief  respite  from  fighting.  The  feel- 
ings of  an  Israelite,  as  he  looked  back  upon  his  nation's  long  struggle, 
can  scarcely  have  been  amicable  toward  those  with  whom  he  had 
waged  so  many  conflicts.  He  rejoiced  in  the  downfall  of  Damascus, 
and  would  have  taken  equal  pleasure  in  the  discomfiture  of  other 
hereditary  foes.  Revenge  was  a  far  sweeter  thought  to  him  than  for- 
giveness, and  one  more  likely  to  stir  his  enthusiasm  and  arouse  his 
zeal. 

The  bearing  of  the  preceding  discussion  upon  the  question  of  the 
origin  of  the  idea  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  may  now  be  briefly  summa- 
rized. The  people  of  Israel  in  the  eighth  and  ninth  centuries  had 
inherited  and  developed  the  idea  that  they  were  destined  by  Yahweh 
for  great  things.  They  thought  themselves  certain  of  attaining 
political  preeminence.  They  were  to  be  instrumental  in  demonstrating 
to  the  nations  the  superiority  of  Yahweh,  Israel's  God,  over  all  the 
gods  of  the  nations.  With  a  conception  of  Yahweh  as  but  one  — 
howbeit  the  greatest  one  —  among  many  gods,  it  was  necessary  for 
them  to  prove  his  greatness  to  the  surrounding  peoples  who  were  in 
like  manner  proud  of  their  own  respective  gods.  Yahweh  had  repeat- 
edly shown  himself  to  be  efficient  and  worthy  of  all  confidence  as  a 
war-god.  It  was  along  this  line  that  his  superiority  was  to  be  proved 
to  the  nations.  Yahweh  had  shown  his  pleasure  in  Israel  and  had  mani- 
fested his  power  in  recent  days  by  overthrowing  Damascus,  her  bitterest 
foe.  How  natural  that  the  great  majority  in  Israel  should  feel  encour- 
aged and  should  hope  for  the  speedy  coming  of  the  day  when  Yahweh 
should  manifest  himself  in  behalf  of  his  people  and  bring  disaster  and 


lo  THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH 

destruction  to  all  their  foes,  thereby  proving  his  own  supremacy  over 
all  other  gods  and  the  superiority  of  his  chosen  people  over  all  the 
peoples  of  other  gods  !  T\\t  popular  conception  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh 
was,  in  short,  that  of  a  great  day  of  battle  on  which  Yahweh  would 
place  himself  at  the  head  of  the  armies  of  Israel  and  lead  them  on  to 
overwhelming  victory  over  all  their  enemies. '= 

In  the  hands  of  Amos  this  conception  underwent  a  transformation. 
As  heretofore  it  had  been  instrumental  in  stimulating  the  national 
spirit  and  life,  so  now,  purified  from  its  grosser  elements,  it  is  made  to 
contribute  to  the  development  of  the  religious  and  moral  life  of  the 
people.  Instead  of  being  the  day  of  Israel's  glorification  at  the 
expense  of  her  enemies,  it  now  became  the  day  of  her  humiliation 
and  chastisement  at  the  hands  of  Yahweh.  It  was  a  complete 
reversal  of  all  the  hopes  which  Israel  had  so  long  centered  in  this 
day.  The  first  announcement  of  the  new  doctrine  (Amos  5  :  i8  ff.) 
must  have  fallen  upon  the  people  with  startling  suddenness  ;  it  was  a 
rude  awakening  from  a  pleasant  dream. 

'SThe  view  of  Hoffmann,  Zeitschrift  fiir  die  alttestamentliche  Wissenschaft 
{^ZATIV.),  1883,  p.  112,  that  in  the  popular  conception  the  Day  of  Yahweh  was  looked 
upon  as  z.  feast  day  has  no  support  aside  from  the  fact  that  the  context  of  Amos  5  :  18  ff. 
takes  up  the  question  of  feasts,  and  this  is  not  sufficient  to  establish  the  usage  in  view  of 
the  indications  favorable  to  the  view  adopted  here.  For  other  instances  of  DT^  in  the 
sense  "  day  of  battle "  see  Isa.  9:3  =  "j'^TQ  DT3 ,  and  Hos.  2:2  =  bi^yiT"^  DT^ ; 

cf.  Obad.,  vs.  Ii  =  THi?  DT',  and  Ps.  137:7  =  DblDI"!"!  011.  The  Arabic  (1^. 
is  frequently  used  in  the  same  sense;  see  the  Quran,  Sura  45,  vs.  13,  where  the 
expression  "days  of  God"  is  interpreted  by  Arabic  commentators  as  meaning  days 
when  God  overthrows  the  infidels  in  battle.  Schultens,  Liber  Jobi  cum  nova  ver- 
sione  .  .  .  .  et  cotnmentario  perpetuo,  etc.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  54  f.,  quotes  in  support  of  this 
usage  the  following  passage  from  Hamasa: 

^w>Jo   xjLco   oiaJI   Ijl 

"Who  saw  our  day  and  the  day  of  the  sons  of  Teim, 
When  the  dust  was  made  coherent  with  its  blood  ?" 

2^\A  ixom.  Omar  ibn  Keltsoutn :  LiJoLc  JU-Lo  (•Ls^l  oJbl  Uj  "Nor  have  the 
days  \i.  e.,  days  of  battle]  left  any  resources  in  our  possession."  W.  R.  Smith  also 
{Prophets  of  Israel,  Lecture  III,  note  15)  refers  to  a  section  on  the  "Days  of  the 
Arabs"  in  the  Ikd oi  Ibn  "Abd  Rabbih,  Egyptian  ed.,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  60  f.,  from  which 
he  cites  the  phrase  "the  days  of  Tamim  against  Bekr"  {Ikd,  p.  80)  in  illustration  of 
the  fact  that  among  the  Arabs  the  day  of  battle  was  often  named  after  the  combatants. 
See  also  the  Arabic  illustrations  of  the  same  usage  cited  by  Gesenius  in  his  com- 
mentary on  Isa.  9  : 3,  and  by  Steingass,  Arabic  Dictionary,  sub  voce. 


THE  DA  Y  OF  YAHWEH  1 1 

The  new  conception  of  the  day  introduced  by  Amos  was  the  out- 
growth of  the  new  idea  of  Yahweh  which  had  taken  possession  of  him. 
It  was  the  practical  application  of  his  thought  of  God  to  the  conditions 
of  his  age.  For  him  Yahweh's  predominant  characteristic  was  right- 
eousness (Amos  5:4-6,  24) ;  and  this  called  for  a  corresponding  right- 
eousness on  the  part  of  Israel.  The  peculiar  relation  she  sustained 
to  Yahweh  only  increased  the  obligation  upon  her  to  be  righteous 
(Amos  3  :  2).  In  the  presence  of  this  demand  for  moral  integrity  Amos 
saw  Israel's  fearful  depravity.  Northern  Israel  had  probably  never 
before  enjoyed  such  outward  prosperity  and  political  prestige  as  at  this 
time.'*  Hints  are  not  wanting  in  Amos  of  the  great  wealth  and  luxury 
of  the  times  (Amos  3:  10,  12,  15;  5:11;  6:4-8).  But  it  was  alto- 
gether too  manifest  that  this  was  secured  largely  at  the  expense  of  the 
poor,  and  that  cruelty  and  vice  of  every  description  abounded  (Amos 
2  :  6-8 ;  3  :  9,  10  ;  5  :  10-13).  Even  the  women  had  sunk  to  the  lowest 
depths  of  degradation  (Amos  4  : 1-3),  and  the  political  leaders,  as  well 
as  the  religious  leaders,  were  foremost  in  wickedness.  Yet  amid  all 
this  moral  desolation,  having  no  conception  of  Yahweh's  demand  for 
righteousness,  the  people  prided  themselves  on  the  fact  that  Yahweh 
was  with  them,  and  that  evil  therefore  could  not  overtake  them.'^ 
Realizing  the  righteousness  of  Yahweh  and  the  wickedness  of  Israel 
as  fully  as  he  did,  Amos  was  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  nothing 
short  of  Israel's  destruction  would  satisfy  the  demands  of  Yahweh's 
justice.  As  the  instrument  for  the  execution  of  Yahweh's  judgment 
upon  Israel,  his  attention  was  naturally  turned  to  the  invincible  Assyr- 
ian army,  whose  victorious  progress  was  ever  drawing  nearer  and 
nearer  to  the  borders  of  Israel.  The  nation  was  ripe  for  destruction  ; 
the  destroying  agent  was  close  at  hand ;  therefore  the  Day  of  Yahweh 
must  be  coming  full  soon — perhaps  even  in  his  own  generation.  It  was 
to  be  the  close  of  the  existing  degenerate  age  rather  than  the  opening 
of  a  new  and  glorious  one,  as  the  people  had  fondly  hoped. 

With  such  a  message  Amos  addressed  northern  Israel.  Wellhausen 
has  called  attention  to  the  artistic  and  dramatic  way  in  which  he  intro- 
duced his  startling  announcement.'^  By  denouncing  the  neighboring 
peoples  and  foretelling  their  destruction  he  raised  the  hopes  of  his  lis- 
teners that  the  Day  of  Yahweh  was  about  to  come  upon  their  foes,  as 

^^Cf.  2  Kings  14  :  25-28,  and  McCurdy,  op.  cit.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  308  f. 

'7  Amos  5  :  14  is  suspected  as  a  later  insertion  by  Valeton,  G.  A.  Smith,  Volz, 
Nowack,  Lohr,  ei  al.;  but  in  any  case  the  blind  confidence  in  the  protecting  presence 
of  Yahweh  which  is  there  attributed  to  Israel  was  characteristic  of  her  in  the  eighth 
century  B.  C.  ;  cf.  Mic.  3:11  and  Judg.  6:13. 

^^  Die  kkitien  Propheten,  on  Amos  2  :  14  ff. 


r 


1 2  THE  DA  Y  OF  YAHWEH 

they  had  long  desired,  only  to  dash  those  hopes  to  the  ground  with 
startling  suddenness  when  he  announced  to  them  that  judgment  was 
about  to  fall  upon  them  themselves.  "Woe  unto  you  that  desire  the 
Day  of  Yahweh,"  says  Amos;  "wherefore  would  ye  have  the  Day  of 

Yahweh  ?     It  is  darkness  and  not  light Shall  not   the  Day  of 

Yahweh  be  darkness  and  not  light,  even  very  dark  and  no  brightness 
in  it  ? "  This  statement  was  followed  up  and  reinforced  by  the 
declaration  of  Yahweh's  hatred  of  their  luxurious  and  superstitious 
worship,  and  his  intention  to  drive  Israel  into  exile  because  of  her  sins. 
In  the  face  of  incredulity,  jeers,'' and  threats,  Amos  persisted  in  his  mes- 
sage. That  day  is  to  be  ushered  in  by  terrible  portents  in  earth  and 
heavens.  Mourning  and  lamentation  will  take  the  place  of  the  songs 
and  feasts  of  the  present.  No  one  will  be  able  to  deliver  himself  from 
the  universal  calamity ;  all  the  workers  of  iniquity  will  perish.  Not  a 
ray  of  light  illumines  the  darkness  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  as  described 
by  Amos.'°  He  saw  that  the  popular  idea  of  it  as  a  time  for  Israel's 
glorification  was  deeply  wrought  into  the  life  of  the  nation  and  was 
fraught  with  great  danger  to  the  higher  interests  of  Israel,  so  that 
nothing  less  would  do  than  to  transform  it  completely  and  present  it 
from  an  entirely  new  point  of  view.  He  must  draw  the  thoughts  of 
the  people  away  from  illusive  hopes  and  fix  them  upon  stern  realities. 
In  the  formulation  of  his  doctrine  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  Amos  did 
not  break  away  completely  from  the  past.     He  utilized  some  elements 

'9  Amos  6  :  3.  Cheyne,  The  Book  of  the  Prophet  Isaiah.  A  New  English  Trans- 
lation, p.  135  [  =  Polychrome  Bible,  or  SBOT],  seems  to  regard  this  passage  as  testi- 
fying to  the  existence  of  two  opposite  views  concerning  the  Day  of  Yahweh  among 
the  people  in  the  time  of  Amos — the  one  looking  forward  to  it  eagerly  as  a  time  of 
joy  for  Israel,  the  other  regarding  it  as  an  evil  day,  but  supposing  it  to  be  still  distant. 
If  this  was  the  case,  all  that  Amos  did  was  to  adopt  the  darker  view  already  existing 
and  endeavor  to  convince  Israel  of  its  near  approach.  It  seems  more  natural,  how- 
ever, to  take  this  utterance  of  Amos  as  addressed  to  those  who  received  his  doctrine 
of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  skeptically  and  ironically,  blindly  trusting  in  their  present  ease 
and  security,  and  refusing  to  credit  gloomy  forebodings  concerning  a  coming  disaster 
of  which  they  can  see  no  signs.  Cf.  the  interpretations  of  this  passage  given  by  Well- 
hausen.  Gunning,  Mitchell,  Driver,  and  G.  A.  Smith. 

^'The  promise  of  Amos  9  :  8^-15  is  from  a  later  hand.  The  argument  against 
these  verses  is  set  forth  in  detail  by  VoLZ,  Die  vorexilische  Jah'cveprophetie  unJ  der 
Messias,  pp.  22-4  ;  cf.  G.  A.  Smith,  op.  cit..  Vol.  I,  pp.  190-95.  Among  many  others 
who  assign  them  to  a  later  time  may  be  cited  Wellhausen,  Stade,  Smend,  Cheyne, 
Cornill,  Marti,  Nowack,  Lohr,  Schwally,  ZATIV.,  1890,  pp.  226  f.;  Preuschen, 
ZATW.,  1895,  PP-  24-7;  ToKKV^y,  Journal  of  Biblical  Literature,WQ\.XN,-pY).iS'i^-\ 
J.Taylor,  article  "Amos"  in  Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the  Bible.  For  a  defense  of 
the  authenticity  of  the  passage  see  Driver,  Joel  and  Amos,  pp.  219-23. 


THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH  13 

of  the  popular  conception  already  existing,  viz.,  the  thought  that 
Yahweh  was  to  manifest  himself  personally  in  judgment;  that  this 
would  occur  on  a  specific  day ;  that  this  day  would  be  a  day  of 
battle ;  that  wonderful  phenomena  on  earth  and  in  the  heavens 
would  accompany  the  day;  that  in  connection  with  the  judgment 
punishment  would  fall  upon  the  enemies  of  Israel  and  of  Yahweh  ; 
and,  above  all,  that  it  would  be  the  time  when  Yahweh  would  vindicate 
himself  in  the  sight  of  the  whole  world.  But  a  radical  departure  from 
the  popular  idea  is  seen  in  the  essential  content  of  the  new  doctrine  in 
accordance  with  which  Yahweh's  vindication  involves  Israel's  discomfi- 
ture rather  than  her  triumph.  This  was  the  necessary  outcome  of  the 
new  conception  of  Yahweh  arrived  at  by  Amos,  for  whom  Yahweh's  love 
of  righteousness  was  greater  and  stronger  than  his  love  for  his  people. 
The  effect  of  the  application  of  this  new  idea  of  God  to  the  doctrine  of 
the  Day  of  Yahweh  was  to  lift  the  doctrine  to  a  far  higher  plane  and  to 
make  it  subserve  ethical  and  religious  ends  no  less  efficiently  than  it 
had  thus  far  subserved  the  purpose  of  national  and  political  develop- 
ment. The  doctrine  henceforth  becomes  one  of  the  most  powerful 
arguments  of  the  prophets  in  their  appeals  to  the  people  of  Yahweh  to 
forsake  evil  and  cleave  to  that  which  is  good. 

Following  the  lead  of  Amos,  the  prophets  continued  to  use  the  idea 
of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  as  a  factor  in  the  work  of  developing  a  purer 
national  life  and  a  keener  moral  sense.  The  pre-exilic  prophets,  how- 
ever, with  the  exception  of  Zephaniah,  did  not  give  the  idea  a  promi- 
nent place  in  their  teaching.  The  term  "Day  of  Yahweh"  appears 
neither  in  Hosea,  Micah,  Nahum,  Habakkuk,  nor  Jeremiah,  and  but  a 
few  times  in  the  genuine  utterances  of  Isaiah,""'  while  Amos  himself 
mentioned  it  only  for  the  purpose  of  combating  the  erroneous  popular 
conception  in  regard  to  it  and  of  putting  an  entirely  different  meaning 
into  it.  This  avoidance  of  the  use  of  the  term  was  due,  perhaps,  to  a 
desire  to  refrain  from  calling  to  the  remembrance  of  the  people  the 
perverted  idea  which  it  represented,  an  idea  so  strongly  intrenched 
in  the  minds  of  the  people  that  expulsion  by  direct  attack  seemed 
inadvisable;  hence  the  earlier  prophets  chose  the  more  indirect  and 
effectual  method  of  teaching  correct  fundamental  ideas  about  Yahweh, 
the  acceptance  of  which  would  drive  out  false  conceptions  of  the  Day 
of  Yahweh. 

='Isa.  2:  12  £f.;  cf.  5:  18  £.;  7:  18  ff.;  9:8—10:4;  I7:4ff.;  22:5ff.;  chap.  13  and 
34 : 8  are  of  later  origin ;  see  the  commentaries  of  Duhm,  Marti,  and  Cheyne  on 
Isaiah. 


14  THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH 

Though  the  immediate  successors  of  Amos  avoided  the  use  of  the 
term  for  the  most  part,  yet  its  content  as  formulated  by  Amos  was 
taken  up  by  them  and  strenuously  enforced  upon  the  nation.  No 
important  contribution  was  made  to  the  idea  by  Hosea,  Micah, 
or  Isaiah  ;  they  adopted  the  view  of  Amos  without  essential  change. 
The  day  of  Yahweh's  visitation  continued  to  be  thought  of  as  a  time 
for  the  punishment  of  Israel's  sins."  Isaiah's  doctrine  of  the  Remnant, 
however,  opened  the  way  for  the  announcements  of  a  blessed  future 
from  later  prophets.  Nahum's  vision  is  confined  to  a  picture  of  the 
overthrow  of  Assyria;  it  is  a  rehabilitation  of  the  popular  conception 
of  the  Day  of  Yahweh,  with  a  change  in  the  reason  assigned  for  the 
destruction  of  Israel's  foes ;  it  is  no  longer  merely  because  they  are 
foes  to  Israel  and  Israel's  God,  but  because  they  are  wicked."^  This 
view  was  stated  still  more  fully  and  forcibly  by  Habakkuk  at  a  some- 
what later  date.^^  In  the  words  of  Professor  Charles :  "According  to 
the  primitive  view,  Yahweh  was  bound  to  intervene  on  behalf  of  his 
people  on  the  ground  of  the  supposed  natural  affinities  existing 
between  them,  whereas,  according  to  the  view  of  Nahum  and  Habak- 
kuk, his  intervention  must  follow  on  the  ground  of  ethical  afifiinities; 
for  Israel  and  the  gentiles  are  related  to  each  other  as  the  righteous, 
p^"i:2,  and  the  wicked,  T^'^  (Hab.  i  14,  13)." '^ 

The  prophecy  of  Zephaniah  was  concerned  with  the  Day  of  Yahweh 
as  no  previous  one  had  been  ;  it  is  the  dominant  thought  everywhere 
present  in  his  utterances.  His  conception  agrees  with  that  of  Amos 
in  that  it  supposes  the  day  to  be  close  at  hand  (i  :  7,  14),  and  to  be  a 

^  The  passages  in  the  books  named  after  these  prophets  which  present  pictures 
of  a  bright  future  in  connection  with  the  coming  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  are  regarded 
by  an  increasing  number  of  scholars  as  of  late  origin.  'i&Q.,e.g.,No'LZ,Dievorexilische 
Jahweprophetie  und  der  Messias ;  NowACK,  Die  kleinen  Propheten ;  Wellhausen,  Die 
kleinen  Propheten;  W.  R.  Harper,  American  Journal  of  Semitic  Languages  and 
Literatures,  Vol.  XVII,  pp.  1-15;  Stade,  ZATIV.,  Vol.  I,  pp.  161-72;  CORNILL, 
Einleitung  in  das  Alte  Testament;  Cheyne,  Lntroduction  to  the  Book  of  Isaiah,  2XiA 
SPOT.,  Part  10;  Duhm,  Das  Buch  /^ja?a  ("Handkommentar  z.  Alt.  Test.");  Marti, 
Das  Buch  Jesaia  ("Kurzer  Hand-Commentar  z.  Alt.  Test."),  and  article  "Hosea"  in 
Encyclopedia  Biblica;  Hackmann,  Die  Zukunftserwartung  des  Jesaia. 

^3 Chap.  1:1 — 2:3  is  assigned  to  a  later  date  by  Bickell,  Gunkel,  Cornill, 
Nowack,  ei  al.,  chiefly  on  the  basis  of  its  form  and  structure.  However,  all  agree  that 
this  opening  section  gives  a  description  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  fully  in  keeping  with 
the  spirit  and  contents  of  the  rest  of  the  book. 

**  Chap.  3  is  quite  generally  regarded  as  a  later  addition;  so,  e.g.,  Kuenen, 
Cheyne,  Cornill,  Wellhausen,  Nowack,  Driver,  A.  B.  Davidson,  G.  A.  Smith. 

*s  A  Critical  History  of  the  Doctrine  of  a  Future  Life,  p.  94. 


THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH  15 

day  of  gloom  and  terror  bringing  judgment  (i  :  2-6,  15  ff.),  which  is  to 
fall  primarily  upon  Yahweh's  people,  but  also  upon  their  enemies 
(i  :  7-18  ;  2  :  4-15).  But  Zephaniah  goes  farther  than  any  of  his  prede- 
cessors, if  we  may  suppose  3  :  8  to  have  come  from  him,  in  that  he 
makes  the  judgment  well-nigh  world-wide.  It  is  not,  however,  strictly 
speaking,  a  universal  judgment,  since  certain  "guests"  are  evidently 
excepted  (i  :  7),  and,  furthermore,  all  are  clearly  not  on  the  same  level 
before  Yahweh,  for  Judah  is  still  regarded  as  Yahweh's  people,  and 
given  blessings  and  privileges  at  the  expense  of  her  enemies.'*  Out 
of  this  wide-reaching  judgment  a  remnant  of  poor  and  afflicted  people 
who  trust  in  Yahweh's  name,  do  no  evil,  and  refrain  from  deceit  is  to 
remain  and  continue  the  relation  between  Judah  and  Yahweh.'^ 

Jeremiah's  work  furnishes  a  good  illustration  of  the  prophets' 
dependence  upon  history.  After  his  first  utterances,  which  seem,  like 
the  words  of  Zephaniah,  to  have  been  called  forth  in  connection  with 
the  Scythian  invasion,  little  or  nothing  was  heard  from  him  until  about 
the  time  of  the  battle  of  Carchemish,  where  Nebuchadrezzar  appeared 
as  the  coming  conqueror  of  western  Asia.  Jeremiah  at  once  grasped 
the  significance  of  this  event  and  sounded  the  alarm  for  his  people, 
continuing  to  preach  repentance  as  the  only  way  of  escape  from  com- 
plete overthrow  until  the  day  his  words  were  fulfilled.  He  did  not  call 
this  coming  calamity  the  Day  of  Yahweh,  as  Amos  had  done  on  a  sim- 
ilar occasion  in  northern  Israel,  and  as  Zephaniah  had  already  done 
in  Judah.  In  the  present  state  of  the  criticism  of  the  book  of  Jeremiah  it 
is  difficult  to  determine  just  what  the  exact  teaching  of  Jeremiah  on 
this  subject  was.''^  But  it  seems  to  have  included  a  simple,  yet  scath- 
ing arraignment  of  Israel's  wickedness  and  a  call  to  immediate  repent- 
ance.    He  lays  greater  emphasis  than  any  of  his  predecessors  upon  the 

'6  Professor  Charles'  treatment  {pp.  cit.,  p.  98)  of  Zephaniah's  teaching  con- 
cerning the  Day  of  Yahweh  is  based  largely  on  the  doubtful  passages  2 : 8-10  and 
3:8-10.  'Moreover,  the  treatment  is  inconsistent  in  that  part  of  its  conclusions  is 
based  upon  the  authenticity  of  these  verses,  while  part  is  based  upon  the  supposition 
of  their  being  interpolated. 

'7  Zeph.  3:14-20  is  considered  late  by  most  interpreters,  e.  g.,  Oort,  Stade, 
Kuenen,  Schwally,  Wellhausen,  Budde,  Cornill,  Nowack,  G.A.Smith.  2:8-11  is 
regarded  as  late  by  Oort,  Wellhausen,  Schwally,  Budde,  Nowack,  G.  A.  Smith.  Well- 
hausen and  Schwally  reject  3  : 8-10,  and  Budde,  Nowack,  G.  A.  Smith,  3  :  9,  10. 

^^  All  messianic  passages  are  referred  to  a  later  time  by  VOLZ,  Die  vorexilische 
Jahwepropheiie  und  der  Messias,  pp.  68-80.  ScHWALLY,  ZATW.,  Vol.  VIII,  pp.  177- 
217,  denies  chaps.  46-51,  and  much  of  chap.  25,  to  Jeremiah.  Cornill,  SBOT.,  Part 
II,  assigns  to  later  times  :  10:  2-16;  17:19-27;  19  :  1—20  :6;  chaps.  26-28,  34,  36-44, 
and  50-52,  and  many  glosses  besides.  To  these  sections  he  adds,  in  his  recently  pub- 
lished pamphlet,  Die  nietrischen  Stiickc  des  Buches  Jeremia  reconstniiri  (Leipzig,  1 90 1, 


1 6  THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH 

religious  life  as  distinguished  from  the  ethical.  The  sins  he  rebukes 
are  idolatry,  sun-worship,  human  sacrifice,  a  superstitious  multiplica- 
tion of  sacrifices  and  offerings  to  Yahweh  in  the  hope  of  thereby  secur- 
ing his  favor,  a  blind  trust  in  the  inviolability  of  Jerusalem  with  its 
temple,  and  failure  to  keep  the  covenant  and  ordinances  of  Yahweh  ; 
see,  e.g.,  7  :  4-10  ;  11:13;  15:4.  He  soon  saw  that  Judah  had  gone 
too  far  in  her  downward  path  to  be  able  to  return,  and  that  destruction 
was  therefore  inevitable.  He  looked  upon  Nebuchadrezzar  as  Yah- 
weh's  servant  (27:6  ff.),  through  whom  he  was  about  to  bring  Judah  and 
all  the  nations  to  judgment  (25  :  15-26).  He  makes  a  great  advance 
in  that  he  admits  the  enemies  of  Judah  to  a  share  in  Yahweh's  mercy; 
those  who  repent  and  learn  Yahweh's  ways  will  be  restored  to  their  own 
lands  after  their  punishment ;  only  the  nations  that  refuse  to  obey 
Yahweh  will  be  completely  destroyed  (12  :  14-17),  However,  the  judg- 
ment is  still  national  rather  than  individual  in  character  ;  Jeremiah 
seems  to  have  only  introduced  the  thought  of  individualism  into  the 
religion  of  Yahweh  and  to  have  left  the  full  working  out  of  the  idea  to 
his  successors. 

The  eschatological,  apocalyptic  tone  of  Zephaniah's  threats  of  woe  is 
almost  entirely  lacking  in  Jeremiah's  preaching.  He  knows  of  no  per- 
sonal appearance  of  Yahweh  upon  earth,  no  extraordinary  departure 
from  the  laws  of  nature,  no  threats  of  sudden  visitation.  His  thought  of 
Yahweh's  activity  and  personality  seems  more  spiritual  than  that  of  earlier 
prophets,  and  his  presentation  of  the  future  is  more  sane  and  rational, 
pp.  xiii-|- 43),  the  following  passages:  chap.  30;  31  :  I,  6-9rt,  10-14,  2i<?,38-40.  GiESE- 
BRECHT  {Handkomnientar  zum  Alten  Testament)  allows  to  Jeremiah  only  I  :  I  — 17  :  18  ; 
chap. 18;  20:7-18;  chaps. 22-24;  25:3  ff.,  15-26;  chap. 27;  32:6-i7a, 24-44;  chap. 35; 
much  of  the  remainder  he  attributes  to  Baruch.  Nath.  Schmidt,  article  "Jeremiah  "  in 
Encyclopcedia  Biblica,  regards  as  genuine  only  chap.  I  ;  2  :  2-13,  20-37;  3:1-5;  4  :  19  ff-; 
7  :  3— 9:21  ;  10:  19-21,23-25;  chap.  I3(?);  15:5-9;  16:2-13  ;  18: 1-17;  19  :  i  f.,  10  f.; 
20  :  1-6  ;  21  :  I-IO  ;  22  :  2-5,  IO-19,  24-27  ;  23  :  9  ff.;  chaps.  24  ;  28  ;  32  :  14  f.;  chap. 
34  ;  37  :  i-io,  1 1  ff.  DuHM,  whose  commentary  on  Jeremiah  {Kurzer  Handcommentar 
zum  Alten  Testament,  1901)  has  just  come  to  hand,  assigns  the  following  portions, 
with  the  exception  of  minor  glosses,  to  Jeremiah,  viz.:  chaps.  2-6;  8;  9:1-21; 
10:19-22;    11:15-20;    12:7-12;    13:15-17;    14:2-10,  17  f.;    chap.  15;     16:5-7; 

17  :  1-4,  9  f.,  14-17  ;  18  :  13-20  ;  20  :  7-18  ;  chap.  22  ;  23  :  9-15  ;  30  :  12-15  ;  31  :  2-6, 
15-22;  38:22.  To  Baruch  he  assigns:  7:x8;  chap.  26 ;  27:2f.;  chap.  28 ;  29:1, 
3-7,  II-15,  21-29;  32  :6-I5;  34  :  I-ii  ;  35  :  I-II  ;  36:  I-26,  32;  37  :5,  12-18,  20  f.; 
38:1,3-22,24-28;  39:3,14a,-  40:6 — 42:9;  42:130,14,19-21;  43:1-7;  44:15-19, 
24  f.,  28^/  chap.  45.  The  remainder  of  the  book  was  added  by  various  hands  at 
various  times,  the  messianic  utterances  and  the  oracles  against  foreign  nations  being 
among  the  latest  additions.  These  latter  come  from  as  late  a  time  as  the  end  of  the 
second  century  B.  C. 


THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH  I? 

The  pre-exilic  conception  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  was  preeminently 
that  of  a  day  of  judgment  —  a  gloomy,  forbidding  event,  fraught  with 
punishment  for  Israel.  The  character  of  the  times  and  the  spirit  of 
the  people  made  it  necessary  for  the  prophets  to  take  this  view  of  the 
day  whenever  they  touched  upon  the  subject  of  Israel's  future.  They 
felt  themselves  to  be  reformers  sent  to  a  "  wicked  and  adulterous  gen- 
eration," and  they  devoted  all  their  energies  to  the  work  of  arousing 
the  people  from  their  moral  stupor  and  convincing  them  of  their  awful 
condition  and  of  the  near  approach  of  punishment.  To  this  end 
they  uttered  the  threats  of  chastisement  and  painted  the  scenes  of  dis- 
aster so  often  associated  with  the  thought  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh.  In 
a  low  stage  of  religious  development  messages  of  doom  are  often  the 
most  effective  means  of  reaching  men's  minds  and  hearts.  Moham- 
med's preaching  was  largely  made  up  of  this  sort  of  material,  and 
even  Christian  preachers  have  found  it  useful.  Not  that  the  early 
prophets  deliberately  employed  this  method  of  arousing  the  national 
conscience,  though  the  form  of  expression  is  no  doubt  often  embel- 
lished by  rhetorical  device  intensified  by  oratorical  fervor.  They 
were  giving  expression  rather  to  heartfelt  convictions  forced  upon  them 
by  observation  of  social  and  political  conditions  and  illuminated  by 
the  spirit  of  Yahweh.  They  strove  earnestly  to  convince  the  nation  of 
the  truth  of  their  message.  Sometimes,  as  in  the  case  of  Zephaniah, 
they  turned  their  attention  to  Israel's  neighbors  and  proclaimed  their 
destruction,  perhaps  with  a  not  unnatural  feeling  of  satisfaction  ;  but 
primarily  their  preaching  against  the  nations  seems  to  have  been  for 
the  purpose  of  warning  Israel  and  calling  her  attention  to  the  need  of 
reformation,  if  she  would  avoid  a  similar  fate.  Nahum  alone  of  the 
pre-exilic  prophets  reverts  to  the  original  pre-prophetic  conception  of 
the  Day  of  Yahweh,  and  even  though  he  does  base  his  exultation  over 
Assyria's  approaching  downfall  upon  ethical  rather  than  natural 
grounds,^'  we  cannot  but  feel  that  he  stands  on  a  lower  moral  plane 
than  his  predecessors  and  contemporaries  in  the  prophetic  office. 

It  was  not  till  Israel  was  already  feeling  the  bonds  of  captivity  that 
Jeremiah  changed  his  tone  and  began  preaching  words  of  encourage- 
ment and  hope  to  Israel.  Then  he  cheered  her  with  promises  of  return 
from  captivity  and  of  restoration  to  her  former  glory.  In  this  return 
and  blessing  northern  Israel  was  also  to  have  a  share.  A  new  cove- 
nant of  love  was  to  be  established  between  Yahweh  and  his  people,  a 
covenant  engraved  upon  their  hearts ;  and  the  nation  was  to  become  a 
source  of  wonder  to  surrounding  peoples  because  of  her  prosperity  (33:9). 

=5  Cf.  Charles,  op.  cit.,  p.  94. 


ft  Y 


1 8  THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH 

In  thus  painting  the  future  of  Israel  bright,  Jeremiah  was  followed 
by  practically  alUsucceeding  prophets.  The  fall  of  Jerusalem  and  the 
exile  of  the  people  marked  an  epoch  in  religious  as  well  as  political 
history.  As  long  as  Jerusalem  remained  standing,  the  old  superstitious 
belief  in  its  charmed  life  continued,  and  prevented  the  people  from 
coming  to  a  true  understanding  of  the  relation  existing  between 
Yahweh  and  themselves.  Hence  both  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  had  con- 
stantly reiterated  the  announcement  of  the  coming  destruction,  and 
had  thus  prepared  the  people  to  understand,  in  some  measure  at  least, 
the  significance  of  the  shock  when  it  came  upon  them.  The  great 
disaster  completely  dissipated  all  false  confidence,  and  opened  the  way 
for  the  propagation  of  new  and  grander  conceptions  of  Yahweh  and 
his  will. 

In  connection  with  many  other  new  teachings,  the  thought  of 
Israel's  restoration  to  Yahweh's  favor  was  emphasized  by  both  Jeremiah 
and  Ezekiel,  and  this  thought  served  to  keep  the  disheartened  people 
from  deserting  Yahweh  and  allying  themselves  with  the  successful 
gods  of  Babylon  or  lapsing  into  indifference,  skepticism,  and  practical 
atheism.  The  Day  of  Yahweh  is  given  a  larger  place  in  Ezekiel's 
thought  than  in  that  of  Jeremiah,  and  this  is  natural  in  view  of  the 
fact  that  Jeremiah  sought  to  reform  the  nation,  and  so  to  avert  the 
impending  disaster,  while  Ezekiel,  especially  after  586  B.  C,  concerned 
himself  chiefiy  with  the  future  of  his  people.  Ezekiel  conceives  of  the 
Day  of  Yahweh  throughout  as  a  day  of  battle  quite  in  harmony  with 
the  pre-prophetic  representation  ;  but  prior  to  586  B.  C.  it  is  a  day  of 
battle  on  which  Yahweh  inflicts  terrible  punishment  on  Israel  because 
of  her  sins  (7:9  ff.;  13  :  5);  after  that  date  it  becomes  a  day  of  battle  on 
which  Yahweh  triumphs  gloriously  over  the  heathen  world  (30:2  ff.; 
34  :  12  ;  39  :  8  ff.).  The  visitation  of  Yahweh  upon  Israel  for  the  pur- 
pose of  her  purification  is  historically  mediated,  the  Babylonians  being 
the  agents  of  Yahweh,  just  as  the  Assyrians  had  been  thought  of  by 
Amos  and  Isaiah,  and  the  Scythians  by  Zephaniah.  The  judgment 
upon  Israel  is  also  a  national  one  as  heretofore,  but  there  is  at  least  a 
suggestion  (11  :  17-21  ;  21  :25)  of  the  idea  of  a  judgment  day  for  the 
individual,  an  outcome  of  Ezekiel's  belief  in  the  individual  responsibility 
of  each  soul  before  Yahweh.  The  result  of  the  chastisement  of  Israel 
will  be  her  purification  from  sin  and  her  loving  allegiance  to  Yahweh, 
who  will  restore  both  branches  of  the  nation  to  their  homes  and 
unite  them  under  the  rule  of  the  messianic  king.  In  connection 
with  and  preparatory  to  the  deliverance  of  Israel,  judgment  is  to  fall 


i  - 

THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH  19 

upon  the  nations  hostile  to  Yahweh,  and  especially  upon  Egypt  (chaps. 
30-32),  the  latter  being  singled  out,  no  doubt,  because  of  the  promi- 
nent part  she  had  played  in  bringing  about  Israel's  calamity. 

After  restored  Israel  is  established  in  the  favor  of  Yahweh,  the  great 
final  Day  of  Yahweh  is  to  come  upon  the  heathen  world  (chaps.  38, 
39).  The  description  of  this  day  has  in  it  apocalyptic  elements,  and 
is  also  conceived  in  a  spirit  of  particularism,  two  things  developed  to 
their  full  extent  in  later  Judaism.  The  forces  of  the  heathen  world 
are  represented  as  gathering  upon  the  mountains  of  Israel  for  the 
great  battle  against  her.  Under  the  leadership  of  Gog,  prince  of  the 
land  of  Magog,  the  hosts  assemble  from  all  quarters  till  they  seem  like 
a  storm,  like  a  cloud  covering  the  land.  But  they  are  permitted  to 
assemble  by  Yahweh  only  that  he  may  destroy  them.  Without  any 
effort  on  the  part  of  Israel  they  are  to  be  annihilated.  Violent  earth- 
quakes will  overwhelm  them  with  terror;  in  their  confusion  they  will 
set  upon  and  slay  one  another;  pestilence  will  smite  them,  and 
Yahweh  will  rain  fire,  hail,  and  brimstone  upon  them.  By  this  will 
all  peoples  be  made  to  know  Yahweh,  Israel's  Holy  One.  All  that 
Israel  has  to  do  is  to  go  forth  and  clean  up  the  land  after  the  conflict ; 
seven  months  will  it  take  them  to  bury  the  slain  and  seven  years  to 
burn  their  weapons,  so  great  will  be  the  slaughter. 

In  so  far  as  Ezekiel's  Day  of  Yahweh  has  to  do  with  the  nations, 
there  is  little  advance  beyond  the  original  pre-prophetic  idea.  It  is 
altogether  a  time  of  destruction  for  them,  and  that  because  they  have 
presumed  to  regard  lightly  Israel  and  Israel's  God.  There  is  not  a 
promise  made  to  them,  nor  a  hope  of  any  description  held  out  to 
them.  Everything  is  done  for  the  sake  of  Israel  and  Yahweh.  This 
is  a  natural  result  of  the  harsh  treatment  that  Israel  received  in  her 
exilic  experience,  and  is  the  point  of  view  occupied  by  all  the  prophets 
of  this  period.  Ezekiel  evidently  gives  up  the  old  idea  of  one  day, 
and  seems  to  have  in  mind  rather  an  extended  period  of  time. 
There  are  at  least  three  definite  and  distinct  stages  in  his  "day," 
viz.:  (r)  a  day  upon  Israel  when  Jerusalem  falls;  (2)  a  day  upon  Egypt 
and  the  nations  when  Israel  is  restored ;  and  (3)  a  final  day  upon  the 
representatives  of  the  whole  heathen  world.  The  beginning  of  the 
formation  of  the  dogma  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  is  manifested  here  in 
the  absence  of  historical  agents  as  mediators  of  the  judgment  upon 
Gog  and  his  host,  and  in  the  universal  character  of  the  judgment 
inflicted  upon  Gog.  In  all  previous  judgment  scenes  the  nations 
made   to   suffer  the  wrath  of  Yahweh   have  been   those  who  have  in 


20  THE  DAY  OF  YAH  WE  H 

various  ways  brought  upon  themselves  the  wrath  of  Israel,  and  they 
have  been  distinctly  cited  by  name.  But  heie  the  statement  is  broad 
and  indefinite;  it  is  a  judgment  upon  the  representatives  of  the  non- 
Israelitish  world  as  such. 

Not  a  prophet  from  the  time  of  Ezekiel  on  through  to  the  close  of 
the  activity  of  the  prophets  failed  to  show  marked  interest  in  things 
pertaining  to  the  Day  of  Yahweh  and  the  future  which  it  was  to  usher 
in.  Sometimes  they  used  the  terrors  of  the  day  as  a  scourge  with 
which  to  whip  the  nation  into  line  with  their  own  lofty  ideals  of 
morality  and  religion  ;  but  more  frequently  they  used  it  as  a  source  of 
consolation  and  hope  for  the  people  in  the  midst  of  their  discourage- 
ment and  misery,  presenting  it  in  vivid  colors  as  a  time  when  Israel 
was  to  enter  gladly  upon  the  enjoyment  of  a  glorious  future. 

In  Ezekiel  the  day  is  noteworthy  chiefly  for  the  fact  that  the  prophet 
conceives  of  it  as  the  time  when  Yahweh  will  take  vengeance  upon  his 
foes.  The  thought  of  vengeance  was  sweet  to  Israel  during  and  after 
her  bitter  experience  as  a  captive  in  a  strange  land.  The  true  prophets 
were  through  every  experience  unswerving  in  their  loyalty  to  Yahweh, 
and  they  believed,  in  later  times  at  least,  that  his  dominion  was  to  be 
extended  over  the  whole  earth.  But  they  had  not  yet  succeeded  in 
emancipating  Yahweh  from  bondage  to  the  people  of  his  choice. 
Yahweh's  supremacy  over  the  world  was  only  to  be  brought  about  in 
connection  with  the  political  exaltation  of  Israel,  his  own  peculiar 
people,  in  triumph  and  power  over  all  her  enemies.  They  must  be 
overthrown  before  Israel  could  attain  the  place  necessary  for  her  as 
Yahweh's  representative  in  the  earth. 

A  similar  spirit  to  that  prevalent  in  Ezekiel  is  exhibited  in  Isa. 
13:2 — 14:23.^°  The  Day  of  Yahweh  here  is  preeminently,  if  not 
exclusively,  a  time  when  Yahweh's  fury  is  to  be  poured  out  upon 
Babylon.  The  nations  will  gather  against  her,  and  the  Medes  espe- 
cially will  be  stirred  up  against  her  —  a  pitiless  and  terrible  people 
that  cannot  be  turned  from  its  purpose  by  the  most  lavish  bribery. 
Babylon  will  be  utterly  destroyed,  with  all  the  horrors  and  barbarities 
of  oriental  warfare.  The  approach  of  this  awful  day,  which  is  near  at 
hand,  will  be  signalized  by  an  eclipse  of  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  and 

3°This  passage  is  assigned  to  the  close  of  the  exile  byDuhm;  CHEYtiE,  IniroJuc- 
tion,  pp.  67-78;  G.  A.  Smith,  Skinner,  Marti,  e(  al.  The  ode  in  14:4(^-22  is  claimed 
for  Isaiah  by  VVinckler,  Altorientalische  Forschungen,Yo\.  \,  pp.  193  f.;  so  also 
W.  H.ConVi,  Journal  of  Biblical  Literature,  1896,  pp.  18-35;  for  a  criticism  of  this 
position  see  Cheyhe,  Journal  0/ Biblical  Literature,  1897,  pp.  131-5. 


THE  DA  V  OF  YAHWEH  2 1 

by  a  great  earthquake,  shaking  both  earth  and  sky,  and  spreading  terror 
everywhere.  As  a  result  of  it,  Judah  will  be  restored  to  her  own  land, 
and  the  very  peoples  who  have  hitherto  scorned  and  oppressed  her  will 
escort  her  home  with  honors  and  henceforth  yield  themselves  as  her 
servants.  The  old  relation  of  taunter  and  taunted  will  be  reversed  ; 
Israel  will  now  make  sport  of  fallen  Babylon. 

Isa.  42:13-17  is  another  picture  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  which 
comes  from  this  period.  The  manifestation  of  Yahweh  will  be  in 
wrath  against  the  nations,  but  will  result  for  Israel  in  deliverance  from 
captivity  and  return  home  under  the  guidance  of  Yahweh. 

The  same  tone  predominates  in  the  prophecy  of  Obadiah,  which 
belongs  to  the  period  of  the  exile. ^'  The  Day  of  Yahweh  is  "  near  upon 
all  the  nations,"  and  Edom  in  particular  is  to  receive  just  punishment 
for  her  unfeeling  conduct  toward  Israel  in  her  day  of  trouble.  The 
destruction  of  Edom  is  to  be  accomplished,  as  in  Isa.  11  :  14,  by  the 
united  people  of  Israel.  As  Edom  formerly  oppressed  Israel,  so  will 
Israel  now  oppress  her,  even  to  the  point  of  annihilation.  While  Edom 
is  thus  blotted  out  of  existence,  the  holy  people  left  in  Zion  will  take 
possession  of  Edom,  Philistia,  Ephraim,  Samaria,  Gilead,  as  far  north 
as  Zarephath,  and  of  the  cities  of  the  south.  Over  all  this  Yahweh  will 
reign  as  king. 

Amos  9  :  8^-1 5,  which  exhibits  a  similar  sentiment  toward  Edom, 
may  belong  to  this  period.^"  It  gives  great  prominence  to  a  descrip- 
tion of  the  abundant  material  prosperity  which  Israel  is  to  enjoy  as  the 
favored  one  of  Yahweh  in  the  era  inaugurated  upon  his  great  Day. 

The  future  of  Edom  and  that  of  Israel  are  presented  in  striking 
contrast  in  Isa.,  chaps.  34  and  35,  prophecies  which  seem  to  reflect  the 
experiences  of  the  latter  part  of  the  exile.^^  xhe  Day  of  Yahweh  is 
described  as  about  to  come  upon  all  the  nations,  and  especially  upon 
Edom,  bringing  fearful  slaughter.  As  usual,  it  is  to  be  accompanied 
by  wonderful  and  terrible  signs  in  earth  and  sky.  The  very  soil  of 
Edom   is   to   suffer,  and  by  its  barrenness  and  desolation  serve  as  a 

3'  For  a  defense  of  the  exilic  origin  of  Obadiah  see  G.  A.  Smith,  The  Book  of  the 
Twelve  Prophets,  Vol.  II,  pp.  167-72. 

32  See  footnote  20. 

33  These  chapters  are  assigned  to  the  later  days  of  the  exile  by  Dillmann,  Driver, 
Introduction,  6th  ed.,  p.  226,  and  Giesebrecht.  G.  A.  Smith  and  Skinner  place  them 
after  the  beginning  of  the  exile,  but  do  not  venture  upon  an  exact  date.  Cheyne 
assigns  them  to  the  years  450-430  B.  C,  while  Duhm  and  Marti  put  them  at  some 
time  in  the  second  century,  but  before  the  subjugation  of  the  Edomites  by  John 
Hyrcanus  in  128  B.  C. 


2  2  THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH 

memorial  of  the  great  day ;  given  over  to  thorns,  thistles,  wild  beasts, 
satyrs,  and  the  Lilith,  it  will  be  deserted  of  men  and  consumed  by 
unending  fire.  But  ransomed  Israel  will  return  to  Zion ;  all  her 
afflicted  vvill  be  made  whole ;  flowers  and  streams  will  unite  to  make 
the  homeward  journey  pleasant;  and  every  difficulty  and  danger  will 
be  removed  from  the  way. 

The  hard  experiences  of  the  exile,  and  especially  the  attitude  of  the 
Edomites,  seem  to  have  given  rise  in  this  period  to  a  spirit  of  bitter 
hatred  of  the  nations,  such  as  had  never  before  existed.  There  is  a 
feeling  that  Yahweh  must  vindicate  his  honor  and  his  righteousness  in 
the  sight  of  the  nations,  but  it  seems  at  times  as  though  this  were  over- 
shadowed in  the  mind  of  the  prophet  by  a  desire  for  revenge  and 
retaliation  upon  the  foes  of  Israel.  Yahweh  had  so  long  been  thought 
of  as  inseparably  connected  with  Israel  and  her  interests  that  even  now 
in  spite  of  the  adoption  of  a  monotheistic  conception  of  God,  it  seems 
that  the  vindication  of  Yahweh  can  be  only  through  a  terrible  judg- 
ment upon  Israel's  foes  and  an  exaltation  of  Israel  to  a  position  of 
power  and  superiority  over  the  nations. 

The  idea  of  the  universality  of  the  character  of  Yahweh,  who  was 
acknowledged  in  Israel,  in  consequence  of  her  exilic  experiences,  as 
the  only  God  of  all  mankind,  bore  fruit  but  slowly  in  the  thought  of 
the  people.  One  result  of  the  adoption  of  this  larger  conception  of 
God  was  a  gradual  change  in  the  thought  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh.  The 
necessity  of  Israel's  vindication  in  the  eyes  of  the  world  was  by  no 
means  lost  sight  of,  but  alongside  of  and  instead  of  the  feeling  of  bit- 
terness which  had  reveled  in  a  contemplation  of  the  destruction  of 
outside  nations  there  grew  up  a  feeling  of  satisfaction  in  the  thought 
of  a  possible  conversion  of  the  nations  to  Yahweh  through  the  agency 
of  Israel,  his  messenger  to  the  world. 

In  Haggai  and  Zech.,  chaps.  i-8,  no  very  definite  statements  are 
made  concerning  judgment  upon  the  nations.  Express  mention  of 
the  Day  of  Yahweh  is  made  by  neither  prophet.  Echoes  of  it  are 
heard  in  Hag.  2  :  6  f.,  20-22,  and  Zech.  2  :  9,  which  passages  are  appar- 
ently reflections  of  the  disturbed  state  of  the  Persian  empire  caused  by 
the  revolts  against  Darius.  There  is  but  scanty  reference,  moreover, 
to  a  work  of  preliminary  purification  in  Israel  to  be  performed  by 
Yahweh  before  the  full  tide  of  prosperity  can  turn  toward  her  (Zech.  3  :  9 
and  chap.  5).  In  the  main,  Israel's  future  is  one  to  be  desired  rather 
than  feared  ;  she  has  already  received  her  judgment  and  expiated  her 
sins  through  the  sufferings  of  the  captivity.    The  only  further  judgment 


THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH  23 

that  may  be  expected  is  that  upon  the  nations,  and  little  atten- 
tion is  given  to  this  ;  for  the  prophets  are  chiefly  interested  in  the 
effort  to  restore  the  temple  and  thereby  to  arouse  hope  in  Israel  for 
the  future.  The  effect  of  the  judgment  upon  the  nations  will  be,  as 
usual,  the  exaltation  of  Israel  in  the  eyes  of  the  world.  Instead  of  the 
little  company  of  inhabitants  now  in  Jerusalem,  an  overflowing  popu- 
lation will  be  found  therein.  Yahweh  himself  will  dwell  there,  and 
"  City  of  Truth  "  will  it  be  named.  Yahweh's  people  will  be  gathered 
home  from  all  lands  to  enjoy  the  rich  fruitage  of  their  own  land  as 
blessed  by  Yahweh.  Best  of  all,  so  glorious  will  Israel  become  that 
many  nations  will  seek  Yahweh  and  join  themselves  to  him  in  that 
day  (Zech.  8  :  20-23). 

The  view  of  the  future  given  in  Isa.  2  :  2-4,  cf.  Mic.  4  :i-4,  is  quite 
in  keeping  with  that  seen  in  Haggai  and  Zechariah.  It  contemplates 
a  submission  of  the  nations  to  the  dominion  of  Yahweh,  an  exaltation 
of  Jerusalem  and  its  people  in  the  sight  of  the  world,  Jerusalem  as 
the  center  of  the  world's  worship  and  the  source  of  all  instruction,  and 
the  inauguration  of  an  era  of  peace.  These  ideas  fit  this  period  well 
and  make  it  probable  that  this  prophecy  belongs  here.^4 

The  high  hopes  kindled  by  Haggai  and  Zechariah  were  not  at  once 
realized.  After  the  completion  of  the  temple,  things  went  on  prac- 
tically as  they  had  before ;  there  was  no  wonderful  manifestation  of 
Yahweh's  power  on  behalf  of  Israel;  crops  were  no  better;  outsiders 
were  no  less  scornful  and  malicious ;  Israel  was  apparently  no  nearer 
the  attainment  of  her  ideal.  As  a  result  of  the  reaction  caused  by  this 
state  of  affairs,  Israel  sank  deeper  and  deeper  into  despair.  Even 
those  hitherto  most  faithful  now  began  to  doubt  Yahweh  and  to  ques- 
tion whether  after  all  it  was  worth  while  to  worship  him.  To  this 
disappointed  and  discouraged  people  the  words  of  Malachi  were 
addressed.  They  were  aimed  especially  at  three  classes  :  (i)  those  who 
had  become  skeptical,  doubting  Yahweh's  love  for  Israel  and  his  right- 
eousness; (2)  the  corrupt   priesthood;  (3)  those  who  had  contracted 

34  So  Hackmann  and  Marti.  A  post-exilic  origin  is  favored  also  by  Stade,  ZATW., 
Vol.  I,  pp.  165  ff.;IV,  p.  292;  Wellhausen,  Mitchell,  Corniill,  Einl,  pp.  137  f.,  182; 
Volz,  Cheyne,  Nowack,  et  al.  Duhm  maintains  Isaiah's  authorship  ;  so  also  Bertho- 
LET,  Die Stellung  der  hraeliten  undderjuden  zti  den  Fremden,  pp.  97  ff.  Ryssel,  Unter- 
suchungen  iiber  die  Textgestalt  und die  Echiheit  des  Buches  Micha,  pp.  218-24,  makes  it 
originate  with  Micah.  G.  A.  Smith  maintains  the  possibility  of  its  origin  in  the  eighth 
century  or  in  the  beginning  of  the  seventh.  The  view  held  by  Hitzig,  Ewald,  Kuenen, 
De  Goeje,  et  al.,  that  it  is  an  older  prophecy  incorporated  into  both  Isaiah  and  Micah, 
is  now  generally  abandoned. 


24  THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH 

foreign  marriages.  A  worldly  spirit  possessed  all  classes,  and  the  fear 
of  Yahweh  was  not  in  their  hearts. 

These  facts  determine  the  nature  of  the  conception  of  the  Day  of 
Yahweh  in  Malachi.  It  is  a  day  of  judgment  upon  the  wicked  in 
Israel.  No  word  of  condemnation  is  spoken  against  the  heathen.  In 
fact,  the  book  boldly  asserts  that  the  nations  are  truer  worshipers  of 
Yahweh  than  is  Israel  herself.  The  Day  of  Yahweh  is  upon  Israel 
only,  and  its  preliminary  work  now,  as  always,  is  one  of  purification. 
But  such  is  Yahweh's  love  for  Israel  that  he  will  send  his  messenger, 
even  the  great  Elijah,  before  the  great  and  terrible  day,  to  warn  the 
wicked  of  approaching  destruction  and  save  them  from  the  wrath  to 
come.  No  historical  agent  appears  here  as  executor  of  the  divine  pur- 
pose, but,  as  in  Ezekiel's  representation  of  the  overthrow  of  Gog, 
Yahweh  himself  does  the  work  of  destruction.  The  idea  of  a  day  of 
battle  upon  which  Yahweh  overthrows  the  enemies  of  himself  and  of 
his  people  for  the  sake  of  his  own  honor  is  here  lost  sight  of ;  the 
judge  and  the  culprit  are  the  only  parties  considered  ;  there  are  no 
spectators.  The  prophet  does  not  go  so  far  as  to  put  gentiles  on  an 
equal  footing  with  Israelites  and  to  make  righteousness,  irrespective  of 
nationality,  the  only  requisite  for  divine  favor,  but  leaves  the  gentiles 
completely  out  of  consideration.  Yahweh's  Day  is  not  only  a  time 
for  the  destruction  of  the  wicked,  but  also  the  opening  of  a  glorious 
age  for  the  righteous.  But  the  prophecy  of  Malachi  does  not  dwell 
upon  this  phase  of  the  day;  the  apparent  aim  of  the  book  is  to  bring 
about  a  reform  in  worship  and  in  other  practical  affairs,  and  the  dark 
and  terrible  side  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  is  presented  with  the  purpose 
of  causing  a  halt  in  the  wicked  career  of  Israel. 

From  the  time  of  Ezra  on,  a  new  environment  was  created  for 
prophecy  —  an  environment  in  which  prophecy,  in  its  real  sense, 
could  not  live.  The  adoption  of  the  written  law  as  the  rule  and  stand- 
ard of  life  left  little  scope  for  prophetic  activity.  Everything  was 
controlled  by  the  legal  and  priestly  spirit;  the  prophets  themselves 
were  priests  at  heart.  The  whole  tendency  of  the  priestly  system  was 
toward  exclusiveness,  and  consequently  the  Jews  withdrew  themselves 
more  and  more  from  association  and  fellowship  with  outsiders,  espe- 
cially in  religious  matters.  The  Samaritan  schism,  with  its  accompa- 
nying rivalry  and  animosity,  also  tended  to  embitter  the  Jews  against 
their  neighbors. 

To  this  period,  perhaps,  belong  such  utterances  as  those  in  Isa. 
61:2;  63  : 1-6;  65  :  I — 66  :  24.^5     Here  the  spirit  of  revenge  appears  at 

35  So  Duhm,  Cheyne,  Skinner,  and  Marti. 


THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH  25 

its  worst.  The  remnant  of  Israel  is  promised  all  the  blessings  within 
the  gift  of  Yahweh,  while  his  enemies  are  to  suffer  every  affliction  and 
to  perish  by  lire  and  sword.  Those  of  them  who  escape  will  go  to 
distant  nations  that  have  not  heard  of  Yahweh  and  tell  them  of  his 
deeds.  .Then  will  all  the  nations  join  in  escorting  Israel's  exiles  back 
and  in  rendering  worship  to  Yahweh  at  the  stated  times  in  Jerusalem. 

Some  time  after  Ezra,  Joel  prophesied  amid  a  scene  of  desolation 
and  sorrow.^*  Swarms  of  locusts  had  devoured  the  fruits  of  the  land ; 
all  food  and  drink  were  cut  off ;  drought  had  combined  with  the 
locusts  to  render  destruction  complete.  Even  the  regular  offerings  of 
the  temple  could  no  longer  be  kept  up,  and  this  was  the  climax  of 
calamity  in  Joel's  thought.  He  looked  upon  all  this  as  an  announce- 
ment of  the  approaching  Day  of  Yahweh  (1:15).  In  view  of  this  he 
issued  a  call  for  a  general  day  of  fasting  in  Israel,  and  exhorted  all  to 
humble  themselves  in  penitence  before  Yahweh  and  appeal  to  his 
mercy,  in  order  that  the  destructive  scourge  might  be  removed  and  the 
terrible  Day  of  Yahweh  withdrawn.  The  expectation  of  pardon  is 
grounded  in  the  thought  that  Yahweh's  honor  in  the  sight  of  the 
world  forbids  him  to  destroy  his  own  people  utterly  (2  :  17). 

The  day  of  fasting  seems  to  have  been  observed  and  to  have  had 
the  desired  effect,  for  there  follows  immediately  a  description  of 
returning  prosperity,  with  promises  of  abundance  in  the  coming  days 
(2:18-27).  After  the  realization  of  material  blessings  of  every  kind, 
the  spirit  of  prophecy  is  to  be  imparted  by  Yahweh  to  the  whole 
nation,  regardless  of  age,  rank,  or  sex.  The  Day  of  Yahweh,  which 
was  an  occasion  of  dread  when  near  at  hand,  can  be  looked  forward  to 
at  a  distance  as  a  joyful  day  —  a  dreadful  day  still,  but  for  Israel's 
enemies,  not  for  Israel.  All  who  depend  upon  Yahweh  will  escape  in 
that  day.  The  scattered  exiles  of  Judah  will  be  gathered  from  all 
places  whither  they  have  been  driven,  and  will  be  restored  to  Mount 
Zion.  All  the  nations  —  among  which  Tyre,  Sidon,  Philistia,  and 
Edom  are  especially  mentioned  —  are  to  be  summoned  together  for 
war  in  the  "valley  of  Jehoshaphat,"  in  the  "valley  of  decision."  There, 
in  truly  apocalyptic  fashion,  will  they  be  annihilated  by  Yahweh 
because  of  their  "violence  done  to  the  children  of  Judah."     But  Judah 

3'5The  post-exilic  origin  of  Joel  is  granted  by  most  recent  interpreters ;  e.  g.,  Wil- 
deboer,  Nowack,  G.  A.  Smith,  ef  al.  place  it  in  the  second  Persian  century.  Driver, 
Joel  and  Amos  (cf.  article  "Joel"  in  Encydop(Edia  Biblica),  puts  it  about  500  B.  C,  or 
possibly  in  the  century  after  Malachi.  Wellhausen  makes  it  a  late  post-exilic  work ; 
cf.  HoLZiNGER,  ZATW.,  Vol.  IX,  pp.  89-131.  Yox  a  recent  defense  of  the  early  date 
see  G.  G.  Cameron,  article  "Joel"  in  Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the  Bible. 


2  6  THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH 

is  to  abide  forever,  and  Jerusalem  from  generation  to  generation ;  she 
shall  be  holy,  and  strangers  shall  no  more  walk  her  streets.  This 
world -judgment  is  apparently  aimed  by  Joel  at  the  peoples  that 
have  roused  the  enmity  of  the  Jews  in  their  mutual  intercourse.  The 
words  "all  nations"  evidently  cannot  be  taken  literally,  for  the  men  of 
Sheba  are  still  to  survive  (3  :  8). 

Joel's  Day  of  Yahweh  was  no  longer  a  danger  actually  threatening 
the  nation  ;  as  a  result  of  the  beginning  made  by  Ezekiel  and  the 
further  development,  especially  in  Malachi,  it  was  now  a  well-estab- 
lished dogma.  No  specific  sins  of  the  people  of  Israel  are  cited  as 
occasioning  the  approaching  calamity,  and  the  offense  of  the  gentile 
world  is  merely  that  of  being  hostile  to  Judah.  No  historical  agent  is 
used  in  carrying  out  the  will  of  Yahweh  upon  the  nations ;  he  himself 
accomplishes  their  end  by  awful  catastrophes  in  the  natural  world.  Judah 
alone  is  to  escape  the  terrors  of  that  day,  and  her  deliverance  is  due, 
not  to  her  moral  character,  but  to  the  fact  that  she  acknowledges  the 
sovereignty  of  Yahweh.  The  whole  conception  is  eschatological  and 
apocalyptic  rather  than  prophetic,  and  it  is  dominated  by  the  most 
intense  particularism. 

The  same  general  apocalyptic  style  and  spirit  are  characteristic  of 
Zech.,  chaps.  9-14,  which  section  probably  comes  from  the  troublous 
times  of  the  Greek  period,  when  the  successors  of  Alexander  were 
struggling  among  themselves  for  the  possession  of  Syria,  and  the  Jews 
were  suffering  the  consequences  of  the  strife.^'  The  feeling  which 
exists  toward  outside  peoples  is  the  same  as  that  in  Joel ;  the  same 

37  In  support  of  this  date  see  especially  Stade's  epoch-making  articles  in  ZATW., 
Vols.  I,  pp.  1-96;  II,  pp.  151-72,  275-309;  and  R.  Eckardt  in  ZATW.,  Vol.  XIII,  pp. 
76-109.  Cf.  also  KUIPER,  Zacharia  IX-XIV,  Rene  exegetisch-critische  Stiidie  (1894); 
Driver,  Introduction,  6th  ed.,  pp.  346  f£.;  Wildeboer,  Die  Litteratur  des  Alten 
Testaments,  pp.  354 ff.;  Cornill,  Einleitung  in  das  Alte  Testament,  pp.  193-200; 
NowACK,  Die  kleinen  Propheten,  pp.  34^-54 ;  G.  A,  Smith,  The  Book  of  the  Twelve 
Prophets,  Vol.  II,  pp.  449-62.  Staerk,  Untersuchungen  iiber  die  /Composition  und 
Abfassungszeit  von  Zech.  9-/^,  agrees  with  Stade  in  the  main,  but  dates  li  :4-i7  and 
13:7-9  from  the  year  170  B.C.  KvEtiKJ^,  Einleitung  in  das  Alte  Testament,  Yo\. 
II,  pp.  386 ff.,  takes  the  position  that  chaps.  9-II  and  13:7-9  are  made  up  of  old 
fragments  from  the  eighth  century  which  have  been  worked  over,  supplemented,  and 
arranged  in  their  present  form  by  a  post-exilic  editor,  while  12  :  i— 13  :  6  and  chap. 
14  originated  about  400  B.  C.  Wellhausen,  Kleine  Propheten,  and  Zevdner,  Theolo- 
gische  Studien,  Vol.  XII,  pp.  73  ff.,  assign  chaps.  9-14  all  to  the  Maccabsan  period  ; 
so  also  Rubinkam,  The  Second  Part  of  the  Book  of  Zechariah,  with  the  exception  of 
9  :  l-io,  which  he  assigns  to  the  time  of  Alexander.  For  a  recent  defense  of  the  unity 
of  the  entire  book  see  G.  L.  Robinson,  "  The  Prophecies  of  Zechariah,"  in  the  Ameri- 
can fournal  of  Semitic  Languages  and  Literatures,  Vol.  XII,  pp.  I-92. 


THE  DA  V  OF  YAHWEH 

enemies  are  threatened  with  woes,  viz.,  Syria,  Phoenicia,  Philistia,  and 
Egypt,  with  the  addition  of  Greece,  in  a  prominent  way,  natural  in  the 
later  times.  There  is  the  same  need  of  an  initial  work  of  purification 
in  Israel  as  was  demanded  by  Joel  at  first.  But  the  punishment  of 
Jerusalem  that  the  Day  of  Yahweh  will  bring  is,  indeed,  drastic  ;  all 
nations  will  gather  against  her  and  capture  her,  subjecting  her  to  the 
horrors  of  pillage  and  destroying  half  her  population.  But  their  tri- 
umph will  be  short-lived,  for  Yahweh  himself  will  interpose  with  a  ter- 
rible plague  and  will  set  them  to  slaying  one  another.  As  in  Joel, 
Yahweh  personally  destroys  the  opponents  of  Israel,  and  adds  to  the 
awfulness  of  the  occasion  by  working  wonders  in  earth  and  sky. 

After  this  inaugural  work  of  destruction,  a  time  of  blessing  opens 
up  for  Israel.  However,  a  period  of  mourning  is  predicted  for  her, 
during  which  her  people  will  weep  for  their  former  rebellion  against 
Yahweh.  This  is  a  new  thought  in  connection  with  the  Day  of  Yah- 
weh, and  is  not  at  all  fully  or  clearly  set  forth  ;  it  is  too  general  and 
indefinite  to  admit  of  accurate  exposition.  All  idolatry  is  to  be  abol- 
lished  and— what  sounds  strange,  indeed  — prophecy  will  cease  to 
exist.  Whereas  Joel's  ideal  was  that  all  of  Yahweh's  people  might  be 
prophets,  this  anonymous  dreamer  regards  them  as  quite  out  of  har- 
mony with  the  blessedness  and  holiness  of  the  days  to  come.  He  holds 
prophecy  and  deception  to  be  practically  synomymous  terms — a  sad 
commentary  on  the  prophecy  of  his  day.  The  dispersed  Jews  will  be 
reassembled  from  all  corners  of  the  earth  and  brought  back  to  Judah 
and  Jerusalem.  The  earth  will  yield  abundantly,  and  there  will  be  no 
more  curse  upon  it.  Yahweh  will  be  universally  acknowledged  as 
Lord  and  King,  and  Jerusalem,  his  dwelling-place,  will  be  the  gather- 
ing point  of  all  nations  ;  for  everyone  surviving  from  the  slaughter  of 
the  nations  will  go  up  thither  annually  to  keep  the  Feast  of  Booths. 
This  is  the  most  striking  feature  of  the  priestly  character  of  this  apoca- 
lypse, which  is  even  more  marked  than  that  of  Joel.  Over  all  in 
Jerusalem  will  reign  the  messianic  king  who  shall  speak  peace  to  the 
nations  and  have  dominion  over  all  the  earth. 

Zech.,  chaps.  9-14,  does  not  present  a  coherent  picture  of  the  Day 
of  Yahweh.  It  consists  of  a  series  of  abrupt  and  fragmentary  sketches 
of  special  features  of  that  day,  which  are  not  easily  brought  together 
into  a  harmonious  view.  The  same  general  ideals  prevail  as  in  Joel, 
but  the  particularism  is  not  quite  so  intense,  for,  after  being  severely 
punished  to  bring  them  to  their  senses,  the  nations  are  given  a  part  in 
the  worship  of  Yahweh,  though  evidently  not  on  an  equal  footing  with 


28  THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH 

the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  while  Joel  has  no  place  for  them  after 
their  great  overthrow  on  the  Day  of  Yahweh.  Zech.,  chaps.  9-14,  does 
not  make  use  of  the  term  "Day  of  Yahweh  ;"  all  its  views  of  the  future 
are  introduced  by  "in  that  day;"  but  that  he  has  in  mind  the  well- 
known  Day  of  Yahweh  is  evident  from  14:1,  "A  day  is  coming  for 
Yahweh,  etc."  The  idea  seems,  however,  not  to  be  limited  to  a  single 
day,  but  to  embrace  a  period  of  indefinite  duration. 

Two  sections  from  the  book  of  Isaiah  seem  to  belong  somewhere 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  post-exilic  age,  viz.,  chaps.  24-27  and 
19  :  16-25.^^  The  former  is  thoroughly  in  sympathy  with  Zech.,  chaps. 
9-14,  in  almost  every  respect.  The  writer  lives  in  a  time  of  trial  and 
suffering,  but  "in  that  day "  all  this  will  be  done  away.  The  nations 
will  then  receive  their  deserts  ;  Judah  will  be  saved,  her  exiles  restored 
to  her,  and  her  reproach  taken  away  in  the  eyes  of  all  the  world. 
Jerusalem  will  be  the  center  of  worship.  In  this  apocalypse  the  uni- 
versalistic  element  is  less  emphasized  than  in  Zech.,  chaps.  9-14,  there 
being  only  one  reference  to  the  nations  as  destined  to  enjoy  the  bless- 
ings of  Yahweh  (25  :  6ff.). 

In  Isa.  19  :  16-25,  while  there  is  the  usual  prediction  of  woe  upon 
the  nations  as  they  are  represented  in  Egypt,  it  is,  nevetheless,  dis- 
tinctly stated  that  this  is  only  of  a  disciplinary  nature,  and  that  in  con- 
sequence Egypt  will  repent  and  turn  to  Yahweh.  Then  follows  the 
most  generous  and  universal  teaching  in  all  prophecy.  Egypt  and 
Assyria  —  the  apocalyptic  name  for  Syria  —  representing  the  whole 
heathen  world,  are  to  share  equally  with  Israel  in  the  worship  and  ser- 
vice of  Yahweh  and  in  the  enjoyment  of  his  favor.  "  Blessed  be  Egypt, 
my  people,  and  Assyria,  the  work  of  my  hands,  and  Israel,  mine 
inheritance."  Not  one  advantage  is  assigned  to  Judah  or  Jerusalem. 
It  is  not  even  necessary  to  come  up  to  Jerusalem  to  worship,  for  there 
will  be  an  altar  in  the  midst  of  Egypt.  There  will  be  constant  inter- 
course between  Egypt  and  Syria,  and  the  two  peoples  will  worship 
Yahweh  together  oblivious  of  all  past  enmity. 

The  book  of  Daniel,  while  it  does  not  make  reference  to  the  Day 
of  Yahweh  by  name,  is  nevertheless  a  gathering  up  of  the  fruitage  of 
that  idea.     It  is  rather  a  record  and  an  embodiment  of  the  influence  of 

3^  Isa.,  chaps.  24-27,  can  scarcely  be  definitely  assigned  with  certainty.  Ewald, 
Delitzsch,  Dillmann,  Kirkpatrick,  Driver,  et  al.  put  it  in  the  early  post-exilic  period. 
Kuenen,  Cornill,  Smend  {ZArW.,^o\.  IV,  pp.  161  ff.),  Wildeboer,  Cheyne,  et  al. 
assign  it  to  the  second  Persian  century.  Duhm,  Marti,  et  al.  date  it  about  128 
B.C.  Chap.  19: 16-25  is  dated  about  160  B.  C.  by  Duhm  and  Marti,  while  Cheyne 
and  Kittel  assign  it  to  the  years  323-285  B.  C. 


THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH  29 

the  idea  than  the  representative  of  any  further  change  or  development 
in  the  idea  itself.  It  conceives  of  the  Jews  as  occupying  the  position 
of  supremacy  in  the-  world  of  the  future,  and  of  God's  kingdom  as 
finally  overthrowing  all  others.  The  sinfulness  of  the  nation  and  her 
unceasing  opposition  to  God  are  alone  responsible  for  her  present 
trials  and  misfortunes.  When  chastisement  has  done  its  work  of  puri- 
fication, God  will  deliver  his  people  by  his  own  power  and  exalt  them 
above  all  peoples.  Not  only  those  living  at  the  time  of  this  consum- 
mation will  be  partakers  of  its  glory,  but  the  righteous  Jews  of  former 
ages  will  arise  from  their  graves  and  share  in  the  happiness  of  these 
days.  This  thought  of  the  resurrection,  found  also  in  Isa.  26:  19,  is 
rather  an  individual  than  a  national  conception  such  as  the  Day  of 
Yahweh  was,  and  its  origin  and  development  are  to  be  connected  with 
the  growth  of  the  idea  of  individualism  as  taught  by  Jeremiah  and 
Ezekiel,  rather  than  with  that  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh.  But  it  is  a 
national  conception  and  supplements  the  thought  of  the  Day  of  Yah- 
weh in  so  far  as  it  is  due  to  a  desire  to  add  to  the  numbers  and 
influence  of  the  people  of  Israel  in  the  time  of  glory  upon  which  they 
are  about  to  enter. 

Through  all  the  development  of  the  idea  of  the  Day  of  Yahweh 
in  the  Old  Testament  there  clung  to  it  certain  characteristic  features, 
some  of  which  passed  on  into  the  later  form  of  the  idea  found  in 
the  New  Testament.  They  were  never  all  equally  prominent  at  one 
time,  but  received  different  degrees  of  emphasis  according  as  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  times  and  the  thought  of  the  nation  changed. 
The  very  existence  of  the  idea  itself  was  a  constant  testimony  to  the 
fact  that  the  nation  felt  its  inability  to  work  out  its  own  destiny  and 
trusted  to  Yahweh  to  complete  the  task.  The  ideal  of  its  destiny 
changed  much  as  the  centuries  passed,  but  the  consciousness  of  the 
need  of  divine  aid  in  attaining  to  this  ideal  grew  ever  more  vivid  and 
the  activity  of  Yahweh  in  connection  with  it  ever  more  prominent. 
There  was  also  a  recognition  of  the  fact  that  the  present  age  was  only 
temporary,  and  must  give  way  to  a  better  and  more  glorious  one  which 
should  abide  forever.  To  inaugurate  and  establish  this  new  era  it  was 
necessary  that  Yahweh  himself  should  come  to  earth  in  person  and 
institute  the  new  order  of  things.  This  idea  of  the  coming  of  Yahweh 
was  very  crude  and  anthropomorphic  in  the  first  stages  of  the  idea  of  the 
Day  of  Yahweh,  but  as  the  thought  concerning  God  became  truer  and 
more  exalted,  the  coming  of  Yahweh  was  gradually  thought  of  in  a  more 
and  more  spiritual  sense.     Connected  with  this  coming  of  Yahweh  was 


30  THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH 

constantly  pictured  a  series  of  great  catastrophes  in  the  natural  world  ; 
marvelous  portents  on  land  and  sea,  in  air  and  sky.  These  convulsions 
and  shocks  were  just  as  numerous  and  conspicuous  at  the  end  of  the 
development  of  the  idea  as  at  its  beginning  —  indeed,  rather  more  so 
after  the  Day  of  Yahweh  began  to  take  on  apocalyptic  coloring.  This 
idea  of  wonders  and  horrors  in  the  natural  world  accompanying  a  revo- 
lution in  the  moral  and  spiritual  world  was  a  natural  outcome  of  the 
Hebrew  conception  of  the  physical  universe,  which  took  no  account  of 
universal  and  inviolable  natural  laws,  but  thought  of  Yahweh  as  direct- 
ing the  movements  of  the  physical  world  in  the  most  direct  and  per- 
sonal way;  it  was  his  ordinary  custom  to  punish  religious  backslidings 
by  withholding  the  products  of  the  soil.  Nature,  religion,  and  morals 
were  directly  and  closely  related  to  each  other  through  Yahweh,  and 
nothing  was  more  natural  than  that  a  great  change  in  the  latter  sphere 
should  be  introduced  and  accompanied  by  momentous  actions  in  the 
former  sphere.^' 

The  coming  of  Yahweh  was  always  thought  of  as  being  for  puni- 
tive purposes.  Sometimes  emphasis  was  laid  upon  the  guilt  of  the 
nations  as  being  the  occasion  of  the  punishment,  sometimes  on  that  of 
Israel.  Usually  both  came  in  for  a  share  of  the  chastisement,  though 
more  severe  upon  one  than  the  other ;  but  at  times,  carried  away  by 
indignation  with  his  own  people,  the  prophet  lets  the  nations  go 
unpunished,  as  in  the  case  of  Malachi ;  at  other  times  the  prophet's 
bitterness  of  feeling  against  the  nations  is  so  great  that  he  exhausts 
himself  in  uttering  denunciations  and  threats  against  them,  letting 
Israel  go  free  ;  such  is  the  case  with  Nahum  and  several  of  the  exilic 
prophets.  But  in  any  case  the  chief  end  of  the  day  was  accomplished 
in  the  revelation  it  made  to  the  whole  world  of  the  holiness,  majesty, 
and  might  of  Yahweh,  Israel's  God.  The  time  of  the  coming  of  the 
day  was  always  left  indefinite,  though  for  the  most  part  it  was  conceived 
of  as  near  at  hand,  at  most  distant  only  a  few  years.  But  definite  and 
specific  predictions  were  not  common  with  the  prophets  in  any  of  their 
work,  and  they  followed  the  prophetic  custom  with  reference  to  this 
subject,  leaving  it  in  a  state  of  indefiniteness  that  could  not  but  add  to 
the  terrors  which  they  so  generously  and  vividly  described  —  there  was 
no  telling  when  this  awful  visitation  might  fall  upon  the  earth  !  Until 
the  very  latest  days  this  coming  was  always  conceived  of  as  connected 
with  some  great  historical  movement  of  the  times.  Assyrians,  Scythians, 
Babylonians,  Persians,  and  Greeks  were  each  in  succession,  as  they 
»C/.  Stade,  Geschickte  ties  Volkes  Israel,  Vol.  II,  pp.  225  f. 


THE  DAY  OF  YAHWEH  3^ 

appeared  on  the  stage  of  world-history,  heralded  by  the  prophets  as 
Yahweh's  agents  and  instruments  in  administering  the  punishments  of 
his  great  day.  It  is  not  till  the  incoming  of  apocalyptic  prophecy  with 
Malachi  and  Joel  that  these  historical  agents  are  ever  dispensed  with,  but 
thereafter  Yahweh  is  represented  as  personally  executing  his  own  decrees. 

The  last  common  characteristic  of  importance  is  the  fact  that  the 
Day  of  Yahweh  was  always  represented  as  introducing  a  ntw political 
state.  The  prophets  were  also  patriots  ;  they  were  no  less  loyal  to 
Judah  than  to  Yahweh ;  patriotism  and  religion  were  inseparably 
blended  in  them.  Thus,  even  after  the  most  universal  type  of  monothe- 
ism had  taken  hold  of  the  prophetic  consciousness,  they  were  wholly 
unable  to  think  of  Israel  in  the  new  kingdom  of  God  otherwise  than 
as  the  acknowledged  head  of  the  nations  of  the  world.  Jerusalem  is  to 
become  the  religious  capital  of  the  world,  the  abode  of  Yahweh,  Israel's 
God,  whither  all  the  peoples  shall  come  to  do  him  homage.  From  a 
position  of  the  slightest  political  significance  in  the  world,  Jerusalem 
and  Judah  are  to  be  exalted  to  the  place  of  greatest  renown.  The 
Day  of  Yahweh  was  always  preeminently  a  vindication,  in  one  way  or 
another,  of  Israel,  Yahweh's  own  people. 

It  appears  as  a  result  of  this  study  that  the  development  of  the  idea 
of  the  Day  of  Yahweh  in  Israelitish  history  was  marked,  not  so  much  by 
the  addition  from  time  to  time  of  new  features,  as  by  the  expan- 
sion and  deepening  of  elements  already  present,  at  least  in  germ,  at  the 
time  of  the  origin  of  the  prophetic  conception.  The  great  growth  of 
the  idea  of  God  out  of  which  the  Day  of  Yahweh  grew  and  with  which  it 
was  ever  vitally  connected,  necessarily  affected  the  teaching  of  the  Day 
tremendously.  So  likewise  did  the  great  change  that  manifested  itself 
in  reference  to  Israel's  conception  of  her  destiny  as  the  people  of 
Yahweh,  as  that  conception  changed  gradually  from  one  of  political 
supremacy  to  one  of  religious  and  moral  preeminence. 

But  the  instrument  of  all  this  change  both  in  constituent  elements 
and  in  the  idea  as  a  whole  —  that  which  under  divine  guidance  forced 
Israel's  prophets  and  people  to  enlarge  and  enrich  their  conception  of 
the  Day  of  Yahweh  —  was  the  historical  experience  through  which  the 
nation  was  compelled  to  pass.  No  single  prophetic  conception  better 
illustrates  the  prophet's  relation  to  the  history  of  his  times  than  does 
this  idea.  It  reflects  clearly  from  generation  to  generation  the  polit- 
ical and  social  environment  of  the  nation,  adapting  its  form  and  con- 
tent at  all  times  to  the  demands  of  the  historical  situation,  of  which  the 
prophets  were  always  the  best  interpreters. 


VITA. 

I,  John  M.  P.  Smith,  was  born  on  the  twenty-eighth  day  of  Decem- 
ber, 1866,  in  London,  England.  I  prepared  for  college  in  the  Light 
House  Academy  at  Leominster,  Herefordshire,  and  The  Plantation 
House  Academy  at  Dawlish,  Devonshire.  Removing,  in  1882,  to  the 
United  States,  I  later  entered  Des  Moines  College,  whence  I  received 
the  degree  of  A.B.  in  1S93.  The  next  two  years  were  occupied  in 
teaching  Greek  and  Latin  in  The  Cedar  Valley  Seminary,  Osage,  Iowa. 
In  the  summer  quarter  of  1894  I  entered  the  University  of  Chicago 
and  began  the  study  of  theology  ;  after  a  year's  absence,  spent  in 
teaching,  I  returned  to  the  University  in  the  summer  quarter  of 
1895,  and  remained  in  residence  altogether  fifteen  quarters,  giving 
especial  attention  to  Old  Testament  language  and  literature,  and  to 
Assyrian.  I  received  an  appointment  as  Fellow  in  the  Department  of 
Semitic  Languages  and  Literatures  for  the  years  1897-98,  1898-99. 

In  pursuance  of  my  Semitic  studies  I  attended  lectures  under 
President  William  R.  Harper,  Professors  Robert  Francis  Harper,  Ira 
M.  Price,  George  S.  Goodspeed,  Karl  Budde,  and  James  H.  Breasted, 
and  Drs.  C.  E.  Crandall  and  G.  R.  Berry.  To  all  my  teachers  I  grate- 
fully acknowledge  my  indebtedness,  and  especially  to  President  William 
R.  Harper  and  Professor  Robert  Francis  Harper,  under  whose  direc- 
tion most  of  my  work  was  done. 


r- 


'*'.U°M 


YD   Or.8 


P3S4 


1    ■%- 


^# 


